0
At first many scientists rejected Wegener and the hypothesis of continental drift. What was their main objection to his hypothesis?
Wiki User
∙ 7y ago
The main objection to Wegener's hypothesis of continental drift was the lack of a plausible mechanism to explain how continents could move. Wegener's idea of continents plowing through solid oceanic crust was not supported by scientific knowledge at that time, leading many scientists to reject his hypothesis.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
When scientists rejected the continental drift were they using the scientific process?
Yes, scientists were using the scientific process when they rejected the continental drift theory. The process involves proposing a hypothesis, testing it through observations and experiments, and revising or rejecting it based on the evidence. In this case, scientists rejected the theory because they did not find enough supporting evidence at the time.
Why did the other scientists reject what is his hypothesis of supercontinent that broke apart?
Other scientists rejected Alfred Wegener's hypothesis of a supercontinent that broke apart, known as "continental drift," because Wegener did not provide a plausible mechanism for how the continents could move. Additionally, his hypothesis was seen as radical and went against the prevailing scientific beliefs of the time. It was not until the discovery of plate tectonics in the 1960s that Wegener's ideas gained more widespread acceptance.
The continental drift hypothesis was rejected because Alfred wegener could not?
provide a plausible mechanism for how the continents could move. Additionally, his idea was met with skepticism because it contradicted the widely accepted belief at the time that the continents were fixed in place. The lack of supporting geological and geophysical evidence also contributed to the rejection of Wegener's hypothesis.
Why would many scientist not accept the hypothesis of continental drift?
Many scientists initially rejected the hypothesis of continental drift because there was a lack of a plausible mechanism to explain how continents could move. Additionally, the idea went against established scientific beliefs at the time and was considered too radical. It was not until the development of the theory of plate tectonics that continental drift was more widely accepted in the scientific community.
Describe what scientists now know about Earth that would have answered the scientists who rejected Wegener's theory?
Scientists now know about plate tectonics, which explains how the Earth's lithosphere is divided into plates that move and interact with each other. This knowledge would have answered the scientists who rejected Wegener's theory of continental drift because it provides a mechanism for how continents can drift and shift positions over time. Plate tectonics also explains various geological phenomena, such as earthquakes, volcanic activity, and the formation of mountain ranges.
When scientists rejected the continental drift were they using the scientific process?
Yes, scientists were using the scientific process when they rejected the continental drift theory. The process involves proposing a hypothesis, testing it through observations and experiments, and revising or rejecting it based on the evidence. In this case, scientists rejected the theory because they did not find enough supporting evidence at the time.
Why scientists rejected wegener's hypothesis of continental drift?
Scientist rejected Wegners hypothesis of continental drift at first because he did not have enogh evidence to support his theory. He failed to provide a suitable mechanism that could cause the continents to move.
What was the reason wegeners continental drift hypothesis was rejected?
His evidence was incorrect.
Why was Wegener's hypothesis reject?
Alfred Wegener couldn't describe how the plate tectonics moved. So, scientists rejected his hypothesis.
Why is a hypothesis that is unsupported by observation rejected by scientists?
Simply put, because there is not enough evidence to support it. "Rejected by scientists" should not be taken to always mean "scientist believe it is impossible" - rather, consistent evidence that support the hypothesis has not been produced.
What is it called when scientists state whether there data confirmed or rejected the hypothesis?
findings/conclusion
What it called when scientists state whether their data confirm or rejected the hypothesis?
Stating a conclusion.
Why was the hypothesis of continental drift rejected when it was first proposed by Wegener?
He could not explain how or why the continents moved.
Why was the continental drift rejected by scientists?
yes becouse wenger is not geologist and he could not explain the how continental drift theory
Why did scientists reject wegners theory of continental drift?
Scientists rejected Wegener's theory of continental drift initially because he did not have a plausible mechanism to explain how the continents moved. Additionally, at the time, there was insufficient evidence to support his hypothesis. It was only later, with the development of plate tectonics theory, that Wegener's idea gained widespread acceptance.
Can a hypothesis that has been rejected be of any value to scientists?
Yes. But usually a hypothesis (if, then, because statement) is changed overtime to establish a conclusion on the investigation. The point of the collection of the data is to show whether or not the hypothesis was supported, and if not needs to be corrected/modified. Certain parts may still be helpful/kept but in most cases it is changed
Why did the other scientists reject what is his hypothesis of supercontinent that broke apart?
Other scientists rejected Alfred Wegener's hypothesis of a supercontinent that broke apart, known as "continental drift," because Wegener did not provide a plausible mechanism for how the continents could move. Additionally, his hypothesis was seen as radical and went against the prevailing scientific beliefs of the time. It was not until the discovery of plate tectonics in the 1960s that Wegener's ideas gained more widespread acceptance.
