Group 5 In Class 9/19

Our group focused on the fact that science is not about uncertainty, it is about reliability. This is contentious because in the case of Tom's River, the scientific research was not necessarily reliable. The sample size was not big enough and the results were not statistically significant. This might be because the study was not conducted timely. The researchers may have gotten more accurate data if it was collected closer to when these women would have actually been pregnant. The relationship between scientific uncertainty and environmental policy is turbulent. In order to create new environmental policy, usually policy makers require a certain level of scientific certainty. However, it is often difficult for scientists to collect statistically significant data because they do not have enough resources. These resources are usually provided by the government. Therefore, scientific uncertainty and a lack of resources is a cycle.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Group 2

Ocean acidification is important because it impacts biodiversity. A falling ph level has detrimental impacts on species that build shells or skeleton based on carbonate. For example, tropical corals. Hence ocean acidification destroys ecosystems, resulting in the ultimate disappearance of certain species. The computer generated evidence predicts that if the carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise exponentially, this will result in the drastic increase in the ocean ph level. The levels of PH are predicted to rise as much as they have in the past 300 million years in the next 1000 years. The computer models used past historical and geographical evidence to see what the natural rise would be and compared it to the rate at which ph levels are rising today. It would be difficult for nature to compensate for these damages. Consequently, resulting in further reduction on the marine biodiversity, specifically, coral reefs. Aidan Coco Grace Miske Jingyi Li Ling Zheng
Read more
Group 5: We misidentified the metal as Iron, when it is in fact Zinc. This occurred because we calculated the volume incorrectly which thereby translated to the wrong density. In addition, we observed that the metal did not melt. Our metal also fell apart onto the table which could have been a sign of possible meltage. As for our mineral, we believed that it was quartz, when it was actually Fluorite. We did not believe it had dissolved into the test tube; however, it in fact was slightly soluble. The largest error we made, which would have helped us determine correctly what the quartz and the metal were, was incorrectly calculating the density. If we would have done this part correctly, we likely would have determined the correct mystery materials.
Read more