Final answer:
The six CONPTT criteria, consistent, observable, natural, predictive, testable, tentative, are explained for the given hypothesis and its validity in science.
Step-by-step explanation:
The six CONPTT criteria are:
- Consistent: The statement should be consistent and not contradict any established scientific principles.
- Observable: The phenomena or evidence supporting the statement should be observable and measurable.
- Natural: The statement should explain phenomena using natural causes or processes, rather than supernatural or untestable explanations.
- Predictive: The statement should have the ability to predict certain outcomes or patterns based on the proposed explanation.
- Testable: The statement should be testable through experimentation or empirical evidence.
- Tentative: Scientific knowledge is subject to change and revision as new evidence emerges, so the statement should remain tentative and open to modification.
Now let's analyze the given hypothesis using these criteria:
In the hypothesis, the statement is consistent with the established scientific principle that pollution can affect the health of organisms, which is a natural cause. The number of deformed frogs can be observed and measured in the ponds, making it observable. The hypothesis predicts that ponds polluted with chemical X will have a higher number of deformed frogs compared to ponds without chemical X. This prediction makes the statement predictive.
The hypothesis is also testable through experimentation by comparing the number of deformed frogs in polluted and non-polluted ponds. Lastly, the hypothesis remains tentative as further research and evidence could modify or refine it.
Overall, the hypothesis satisfies all six CONPTT criteria and can be considered within the realm of science.