Question of the Day (21-Apr-17)
The question below contains a paragraph followed by alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the paragraph.
When trying to explain past phenomena, palaeontologists and other historical scientists often construct a set of hypotheses about the causes and then look for a "smoking gun", a piece of evidence which indicates that one of the hypotheses is a better explanation than the others. Sometimes the "smoking gun" is discovered by a fortunate accident during other research. For example, the discovery by Luis Alvarez and Walter Alvarez of an iridium-rich layer at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary made asteroid impact and volcanism the most favored explanations for the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event. The other main type of science is experimental science, which is often said to work by conducting experiments to disprove hypotheses about the workings and causes of natural phenomena- note that this approach cannot prove a hypothesis is correct, since some later experiment may disprove it. However, when confronted with totally unexpected phenomena, such as the first evidence for invisible radiation, experimental scientists often use the same approach as historical scientists: construct a set of hypotheses about the causes and then look for a "smoking gun".