A scientist reads relevant literature and designs her experiment. She repeats her experiment several times and collects an entir
e set of data every time. As compared to a single data set, the multiple data sets lead her to modified conclusions. How is skepticism important to the progress of science in this scenario? It helped with the design of the experiment. It led to the collection of the first data set. It led to the collection of several complete data sets. It helped with reading papers prior to the investigation.
The correct answer is the third one: It led to the collection of several complete data sets.
In this particular scenario, the scientist is following the experimental scientific method. This method is based on observations, a hypothesis that explains the observations, and experimentation in order to collect data to check the hypothesis. This method is fueled by skepticism, meaning that the scientist is not blindly believing the information given by the first collection of data, whether it confirms or rejects the hypothesis. On the contrary, she still repeats the experiment several times in order to collect different sets of data. She does so because she knows that by comparing different sets of data she would get a better picture of the entire experiment so, the more data she gets the more accurate the conclusions will be.
The working class clearly suffered from the Industrial Revolution. They had to live in poor and crowded houses, with the threat of diseases. Most of them didn't have a lot to eat and many starved to death. Whole families had to work and members were separated.
"a. Pizarro sailed down the west coast of South America to Peru" would be the best option from the list in terms of what led to the decline of the Inca Empire, since he ravaged the Incas both with weapons and germs.
