Final answer:
False, The statement suggesting that a defense attorney can only refute scientific test results by retesting in an independent lab is false, as there are various ways to question the validity of the evidence.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement The only thing a defense attorney can do to refute the results of scientific tests performed in government labs is to have the sample tested in an independent lab is False.
A defense attorney has multiple strategies to challenge scientific evidence besides retesting, including questioning the methodology of the testing procedure, the qualifications of the personnel, the condition and handling of the samples, and the maintenance and calibration of equipment.
Moreover, scientific principles assert that important findings must be subject to independent verification, and thus science itself is a self-correcting discipline. This means that a defense attorney can attack the validity of the scientific evidence on several grounds.
It is also important to note that not every experiment can make cause-and-effect claims as they may have limitations. Experiments can be done on humans, but they are subject to ethical considerations and regulatory oversight.
Furthermore, larger sample sizes are generally considered better as they tend to produce more statistically significant and generalizable results. In science, data that does not support a hypothesis is still useful as it helps refine or refute the hypothesis. Experimentation is not the only valid type of scientific investigation–observational studies, simulations, and other methods can also yield valuable insights.
Regarding scientific concepts, a scientific law may be altered if new evidence contradicts it because a law summarizes observed phenomena and does not explain them. A theory, on the other hand, is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world.