A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator.
Re: Scientific Method
Posted by:
J L Mazerat (IP Logged)
Date: July 11, 2022 01:09PM
“If you have multiple competent ignition sources for the same fuel, then you have multiple fire cause hypotheses. If you do not have a fire cause hypothesis that is uniquely consistent with the available evidence, your fire cause hypothesis is "undetermined." “
This is where I have problems understanding based on common sense. If one knows there was a fire, then it is obvious that there was a fuel the was ignited by a competent ignition source. There does not need to be a determination as to what was the fuel ignited or what was the source of ignition for this to be a fact. The same is true if one knows the fuel that was ignited but does not know the ignition source. It is a fact that this fuel was ignited by a competent ignition source or there would not have been an ignition of the fuel. So, the fire cause hypothesis that this fuel was ignited by a competent ignition source must be correct because it is a fact that the fire took place. The only thing that is undetermined is what was the specific source of ignition.
“I am not sure I understand your point of this example. This is not a fire cause hypothesis, where you have identified each element of the fire cause with evidence in this specific incident. What you have done is really define what a fire cause is.”
The point of this example is that one can have a valid hypothesis as to how and why a fire took place without there being a specific competent ignition source identified.
The point I am wanting others to consider is that there are times when facts present themselves that will allow one to reach a conclusion. If all I have is a burned down building, I can have a valid hypothesis that a fire took place. If one identifies the fuel first ignited there can be a valid hypothesis that the fuel was subjected to a competent ignition source. A person does not need to know the first fuel ignited and the specific source of ignition to have a valid hypothesis.
Jim Mazerat
Forensic Investigations Group