An experiment
Evidence.
No, often there is not enough evidence either way.
no. you need to have solid proof that it exist.. else it will be rejected.
When we've proven that the hypothesis is false !
Observations
The Nebular Hypothesis.
The scientific means for proving his hypothesis had not yet been developed.
he developed the basis of asking questions about stuff in an experiment like the whole hypothesis (if, then, because) just to be in general.
The procedures are called Statistics.
people in urban environment and developed countries are more susceptible to the miller-lyer illusions because of their experience with right angles.
Evolution is both: it began as a hypothesis by a scientist who, after some research and thought on the matter, came up with the idea. Since then, that hypothesis has been recognised as a theory, as further evidence came to light supporting the idea and predictions - which were developed based on existing evidence and what the some of the gaps might be - were made, then tested and shown correct.
They are often more uniform.
No... scientific inquiry begins by coming up with a question. From there you develop a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, alter your hypothesis if need be, test again, etc. Only after you have data that supports your hypothesis (if it ever does) do you draw any conclusions. If your data consistently does not support your hypothesis, no matter how it is modified, you may draw conclusions about your basic contentions as well. YES BUT..... what should you ask yourself in drawing a conclusion about an experiment?
They often do. Really.
test your hypothesis.
ANSWER: A verbal hypothesis is when you say a hypothesis orallly.