"Data is part of the scientific method describer in 921. It is the word used to describe the fact, such as the results from observations, experiments, or other direct information. This data is the foundation of the information one uses to evaluate and formulate a hypothesis. Data is synonymous with facts. Based on what is in the methodology section of 921 data is what is used to reach a conclusion. By using the word data, I am not using a word contrary or an alternate language to what is found in 921."

Yes, data is part of the SM. But evidence is how you produce reliability. Data is information that can be documented and verified. Evidence is data that is both relevant and reliable in a specific context. I have explained the example of the presence of a for sale sign.

"I am just saying I like to list al possible hypotheses considered and then from there explain how each one was tested and the results of that testing. I believe education, training, knowledge, and experience goes in a different section of the report. My finding is explained by the facts listed in the conclusion."

You need to document your application of the SM. So listing hypotheses that you have formulated with evidence is great.

"Your statement, “More probable than not” brings us back to the original topic. I believe because there are no absolutes when it comes to the findings based on the scientific method this is where the level of certainty is appropriate. I wish they would leave that section in the document. I watch when the experts state their finding are based on the scientific method. The next question is to ask if that finding is an absolute. This puts the investigator in a place where he will need to use a level of certainty. Then he is asked if his level of certainty is accepted by everyone. You can see where this is going. It is to get the investigator to admit it is possible for there to be another opinion."

More probable than not is not absolute. It is the most reliable determination, until it is not. Science is not final. The justice system is final. Both communities have opposing goals. The most reliable determination based on the available evidence is the answer. If one understands how to reliably apply the SM, this question is easily answered.

"I have trouble understanding how the investigators opinion is not his opinion. There may be others that agree with the findings, but the finding of the investigator’s report can be nothing but his personal opinion. The investigator can say that this opinion is based on the application of the scientific method to the available evidence that was used to reach the opinion. If one were to say that the reliable application of the scientific method by an investigator can only result in the correct finding, then one is saying that this is the only correct conclusion that can be reached by using the available data. This would mean that the finding is an absolute."

I said it is an expert opinion based on the reliable application of the SM.It is not a subjective opinion or a belief. Not a correct or accurate determination. It is the most reliable determination. Science cannot produce correct or accurate determination, if at any time new evidence can be produced that disproves the hypothesis. You need to understand what science actually is and how science is obtained.

"I believe there is subjectivity in the use of the scientific method. The subjectivity and objectivity of science are strongly associated to the nature of science, which is part of science education curricula worldwide. There is a distinction between the partially subjective scientific process and the rather objective end result of scientific inquiry as a schema promoting better understanding in science education. Objectivity is related, independently of any observer, to the true existence of objects and phenomena."

I disagree. There is no support for this view of science or the SM.

"While the evidence-based approach of science is lauded for introducing objectivity to processes of investigation, the role of subjectivity in science is less often highlighted in scientific literature. Nevertheless, the scientific method comprises at least two components: forming hypotheses and collecting data to substantiate or refute each hypothesis. Hypotheses are always made by one individual or by a limited group of scientists and are therefore subjective. The subjectivity is based on the person(s) prior experience and processes of reason employed by those individuals, rather than solely on objective external process. Such subjectivity and concomitant uncertainty lead to competing theories that are subsequently pared down as some are proved to be incompatible with new observations. Therefore, we have difference of opinions by different investigators evaluating the same data. You can find additional information in a published view of subjectivity titled Objectivity and Subjectivity in Scientific Research."

My definition of subjective is essentially says that when something, like an observation, is subjective, it has its basis inside of a person’s mind. When that is the case, the subjective observation is ruled by the education, training, knowledge, and experience of the person that came up with it. A subjective observation is based on how an individual perceives the meaning of what is being analyzed. Therefore, this observation could change wildly based on the person making the observation. As the person(s) making the observation changes then the potential of the meaning of the observations may change.

I disagree. You are turning the SM on its head. There is bias that needs to be dealt with in the application of the SM. This seems to be what you are describing.

Douglas J. Carpenter, MScFPE, CFEI, PE, FSFPE
Vice President & Principal Engineer
Combustion Science & Engineering, Inc.
8940 Old Annapolis Road, Suite L
Columbia, MD 21045
(410) 884-3266
(410) 884-3267 (fax)
www.csefire.com