Gregor Mendel never saw a gene, yet he concluded that "heritable factors" were responsible for the patterns of inheritance he observed in peas. Similarly, maps of Drosophila chromosomes were conceived by observing the patterns of inheritance of linked traits, not by observing the genes directly. Is it legitimate for biologists to claim the existence of objects and processes they cannot actually see? How do scientists know whether an explanation is correct?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 10, 2019, 5:15 am ad1c9bdddf
Yes, it is legitimate for biologist to claim the existence of objects and processes they cannot see. Scientists know that an explanation is correct based on the expected outcomes. For example, the ...
Gregor Medel and hertiable factors are examined on a gene.