Wiki User
β 10y agoA greater proportion of TC parents' children able to TC, when compared with children of not TC parents.
Wiki User
β 10y agoEvidence that family members with similar tongue-curling abilities share genetic similarities, such as specific gene variations or inheritance patterns, would support the hypothesis. Comparative studies across generations within families could also show a strong correlation between the ability to curl the tongue and genetic relatedness. Additionally, observing consistent tongue-curling abilities in offspring of parents who can curl their tongues may further support the genetic basis of this trait.
Linguistic evidence refers to any information or data that can be used to support or analyze a linguistic claim or hypothesis. This evidence typically comes from studying language in various forms, including spoken, written, and signed languages. Linguistic evidence can include things like specific linguistic structures, word patterns, phonetic or phonological features, and language use in different contexts.
Speakers use support throughout their speech to provide evidence, examples, and data that back up their main points. Support is particularly important when introducing new ideas, making arguments, or trying to persuade the audience.
Examples of analyzing questions include: "What are the key factors influencing this trend?" "How does this data support our hypothesis?" "What patterns can we identify in this set of information?" "What are the implications of this finding for our project?"
The innateness hypothesis suggests that humans are born with the innate capacity for language acquisition. Young deaf children who become fluent in sign language support this hypothesis, as they demonstrate the ability to naturally acquire language through exposure to visual-manual communication without auditory input. This highlights the inherent predisposition for language development in humans, regardless of the modality of communication.
Textual evidence serves as the foundation for an interpretive argument by providing concrete support for an analysis or claim. It helps to validate interpretations and allows readers to follow the logic of the argument. Effective use of textual evidence can strengthen the persuasiveness and credibility of the overall argument.
Fossils support his hypothesis.
Hypothesis.
You obtain objective evidence to support it by undertaking experiments designed to test the veracity of the hypothesis.
Which type of evidence was NOT used by Alfred Wegener to support his continental drift hypothesis human remains
The addition of molecular evidence supported the hypothesis made earlier based on structural evidence. Molecular evidence provides additional data that can confirm or strengthen hypotheses that are based on structural evidence.
If the evidence does not support the hypothesis, the scientist should reconsider and revise the hypothesis. They may need to conduct further experiments, analyze the data more thoroughly, or explore alternative explanations to refine their hypothesis and design better experiments. It is essential to remain open-minded and objective in the pursuit of scientific knowledge.
Yes, fossil evidence such as similar plant and animal species found on separate continents has been used to support the continental drift hypothesis. The distribution of fossils across continents suggests that these land masses were once connected and later moved apart.
Well...it all depends on the hypothesis. For example, if you know exactly how to back it up with evidence, than very easy. But...if your hypothesis is kind of 'far out', and finding evidence will be difficult, then writing it will be hard.
The question is very poorly specified so this answer is simply a wild guess at what the questioner might want. Three possible outcomes of any research, designed to test some hypothesis, are: (a) evidence in support of the hypothesis; (b) evidence disproving the hypothesis; or (c) evidence that can neither prove (support) nor disprove the hypothesis.
You can look for existing studies that support your ideas or conduct an experiment to prove your hypothesis.
To support a hypothesis means you agree, and may even give supporting evidence.To refute it means you submit evidence that a hypothesis is incorrect , or you make a cogent and persuasive argument against it.
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.