The scientific method is a process of steps in order to get a conclusion. First, a scientist will observe something. It could be really anything. Then he/she will ask themselves a question. Like how does it do that? Or why does it do that?
Then they will form a hypothesis. This is where you will ask yourself what will be the outcome of the experiment.
Next you actually perform the experiment. If the experiment comes out as your hypothesis predicted, then you accept your hypothesis.
If not, you reject your hypothesis.
Of course, in science you just don't do one experiment. You do it multiple times and even with different circumstances.
Am bored~, am bored~~, am bored~ , am bored~, am bored~~~~~~, don't know what to do, cause am flipping bored~~~~. Feel you too. * sad noises*
Answer:
Science has a central role in shaping what count as environmental problems. This has been evident most recently in the success of planetary science and environmental activism in stimulating awareness and discussion of global environmental problems. We advance three propositions about the special relationship between environmental science and politics: (1) in the formulation of science, not just in its application, certain courses of action are facilitated over others; (2) in global environmental discourse, moral and technocratic views of social action have been privileged; and (3) global environmental change, as science and movement ideology, is vulnerable to deconstructive pressures. These stem from different nations and differentiated social groups within nations having different interests in causing and alleviating environmental problems. We develop these propositions through a reconstruction of The Limits to Growth study of the early 1970s, make extensions to current studies of the human/social impacts of climate change, and review current sources of opposition to global and political formulations of environmental issues.
