I can understand what you are standing, but I have some questions. Do we not use a level of certainty when going through the steps of the scientific method? What opinions being given that use the scientific method that are absolute. The use of the scientific gives one the most reliable determination. By saying most reliable, are we not using a level of certainty. Can one ever say that their use of the scientific method in reaching a conclusion is an absolute fact? Is there no chance for human error when evaluating the evidence during the process of reaching a conclusion? Does not part of the scientific method call for the use of personal evaluate of the evidence? Is this not a level of certainty based on the person’s education, knowledge, and experience? When it comes to the first fuel ignited, how many times is it possible to state conclusively the exact fuel involved. If the investigator cannot say absolutely what is the specific fuel was the first to be ignited, then does he have an opinion that is based on the scientific method. In this case, cannot the investigator use the level of certainty in reaching the conclusion as to what was the first fuel ignited.

Do you consider DNA evidence as being evidence based on the scientific method? If so, why is it the experts in this field always used a percentage of accuracy to support its accuracy. Only one-tenth of 1 percent of human DNA differs from one individual to the next and, although estimates vary, studies suggest that forensic DNA analysis is roughly 95. By these experts giving a percentage of accuracy, are they not using a level of certainty?

Scientists have amassed abundant evidence based on using the scientific method that smoking causes cancer, that the climate is changing because of humans and that vaccines are safe and effective. But scientists have not proven these results definitively, nor will they ever do so. Scientists have agreed for centuries that it is inappropriate to seek absolute certainty from the empirical sciences. They believe that to demand perfect certainty from science is to be 400 years behind on one’s reading on scientific methodology.

Scientists can reach conclusions that one explanation is more rational than competing claims, even if scientists cannot prove their conclusions through demonstration. These extensive and varied lines of evidence can collectively lead to positive conclusions and allow us to know with a high level of certainty that a specific finding is correct.

Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group