https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9 Disproved historical scientific theories by Bridgette Neill en-us 2016-03-23 00:10:06 UTC 2025-09-26 06:19:03 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padletuploads.blob.core.windows.net/aws/105939840/6fdc205530cba4d3f252c94af81db5fe1148eac6/ac49a569964a33753ea0993461fe45e2.jpg bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102824542 2016-03-27 17:42:02 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102824542 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102824589 Spontaneous Generation is the theory that life could generate from inanimate - or lifeless - objects. This theory was fathered by ancient Greeks, mainly Anaximander and Aristotle. Louis Pasteur debunked this theory in the 1850's. ]]> 2016-03-27 17:42:57 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102824589 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102824784 1. Simplicity
- Without access to modern scientific tools like what we have today, spontaneous generation may have been an easy to understand solution to something that was, at the time, hard to understand.
2. Agenticity
- Because people connected this theory with religion (I.e. the belief that God created man from dust, so it must be true), they may have believed God was spontaneously generating these life forms. 
3. Unexplained 
- This theory offered a seemingly plausible answer to an event that at the time, seemed unexplained.
4. Perception/Observation
- It was peoples perceived idea that life generated from nothing (I.e. mushrooms growing out of wood)]]> 2016-03-27 17:48:40 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102824784 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825035 1. Appeal to Authority 
- Both Anaximander and Aristotle were well known, highly respected philosophers, with a proven track record of solving difficult questions people had. People may have been more inclined to accept their idea of idea of spontaneous generation because of this. 
2. Confirmation Bias 
- Because people already had a preconceived perception that things appeared to generate spontaneously, this theory confirmed this idea. People also tended to ignore the fact that life in most other occurrences, was generated because of other life forms.
3. Confusion of Correlation with causation
- People may have gotten confused thinking that spontaneous generation was the cause of life appearing.
4. Ideological Support
- Because this theory correlated with many people's religious beliefs, they may have been more inclined to accept this theory as true. ]]> 2016-03-27 17:57:13 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825035 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825435 2016-03-27 18:11:41 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825435 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825486 The theory of a Geocentric universe is that the Earth is the center of the universe, and that other planets and stars revolved around us. This theory was created by Ptolemy, and was popular among many different civilizations, mainly due to religious and perceived ideas. However, this theory was debunked when scientists  such as Galileo began more "sophisticated observations". It was eventually fully disproven in "De Revoltionibus Orbium Coelestium" by Nicholas Copernicus. ]]> 2016-03-27 18:14:26 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825486 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825640 1. Simplicity 
- Ancient Civilizations did not have tools such a telescopes, which would have allowed them to observe space more accurately, so the idea that celestial bodies orbited the earth made sense, because it was what they could observe. 
2. Ideology 
- Many people already believed the observable celestial bodies orbited the earth, so this theory fit into their pre-existing ideologies. 
3. Perception/Observation
- Since people could only observe space with the naked eye, or with very little technology, it was their perception that objects in space, such as the sun and stars appeared to be orbiting the Earth. ]]> 2016-03-27 18:20:57 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825640 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825777 1. Confirmation Bias 
- This theory confirmed many peoples pre-existing beliefs that the universe revolved around the Earth. 
2. Ideological Support
- Many people believed that God created the universe around the Earth, so it would make sense to believe this theory based on their religious beliefs. ]]> 2016-03-27 18:27:48 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825777 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825948 2016-03-27 18:35:20 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825948 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825977 The Miasma theory states that many diseases, such as cholera and chlamydia were caused by "bad air". This "bad air" created Mismas, which were "poisonous emanations, from putrefying carcasses, rotting vegetation or molds, and invisible dust particles inside dwellings" which would get into a persons body and cause illness. It was not until the theory of germs being the cause of disease became more popular in the 1800's that the theory of Miasmas was disposed of. ]]> 2016-03-27 18:36:25 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102825977 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826132 1. Simplicity
- Because there was virtually no scientific experimentation or even the tools that would allow people to conduct the proper experiments, this may have been a simple answer to why people were contracting these diseases. 
2. Unexplained
- Since no proven scientific experiments had been conducted, this was still considered an unexplained phenomenon. This theory may have been the only logical explanation people had at the time. 
3, Perception/Observation
- Since no one knew about germs or bacteria, it was their perception that diseases must have come from the air. This theory matched that perception/observation. ]]> 2016-03-27 18:41:35 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826132 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826170 1. Confusion of Correlation and Causation
- Because a majority of cases occurred in places where there was pollution, many believed this air was the cause of their diseases, even though it was not the cause.
2. Ideological support
- Many people believed this theory because it fit into what they had already believed - this theory fit their perception that disease came from the air. ]]> 2016-03-27 18:42:53 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826170 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826411 2016-03-27 18:51:30 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826411 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826454 1. Unexplained 
- Again, due to the lack of scientific evidence, sight was an unexplained concept. Because people still believed everything was comprised of the four elements, its not hard to see why this was an acceptable explanation
2. Simplicity 
- People did not understand how the eye functioned, so this theory was a way of giving people an answer to something they did not understand. 

]]> 2016-03-27 18:53:01 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102826454 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102834679 - This is the theory that the human eye does not receive light, but instead is emitted by the eye. People beleived that Aphrodite made the eye using the four elements, and that she "sparked a fire" in the eye, which allowed us to see. This theory was even supported by people such as plato.]]> 2016-03-28 00:26:08 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102834679 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835246 One obvious flaw with this theory]]> 2016-03-28 00:40:21 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835246 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835360 - A flaw of this theory is that it didn't work. There were actual "recipe" books made for how to create your own life form. When people would follow these "recipes" and they did not generate life, people may have started to doubt if this theory was legit or not. 
- Another flaw is that people knew that life created life - I.e. having children. They may have questioned why some life is created by other life forms and some seem to "spontaneously generate"]]> 2016-03-28 00:43:38 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835360 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835615 - A flaw for this theory is that it was very hard to prove. Since there were no tools that would allow scientist to confirm this theory, it was all based on opinions and assumptions. This means it was very easy for the people claiming this theory to be true to make mistakes. There was a lot of missing evidence that would have been necessary for this theory to be legit. ]]> 2016-03-28 00:50:02 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835615 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835998 1. Appeal to Authority 
- This theory is based around the fact that Aphrodite, a God, gave us the ability to see. People do not usually question things when it comes to the Gods - especially in ancient times.
2. Ancient Wisdom
- Because this was a gift from Aphrodite, many people may believe it to be true simply due to this fact. ]]> 2016-03-28 00:58:28 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102835998 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836212 - One obvious flaw with this theory is that we cannot see in the dark. If this theory was true, humans should be able to posses this ability because we would not have to rely on light reflecting off of things. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:03:45 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836212 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836521 2016-03-28 01:09:53 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836521 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836554 This theory states that a persons body was made up of four humors - Black bile, Yellow Bile, Phlegm, and blood. If there was a balance of these, a person would be healthy. If there was an imbalance, the person was ill. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:10:36 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836554 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836724 1. simplicity 
- Due to the lack of medical science, and because of the fact that these four humors related directly to the four elements, which many people believed in may have led them to to believe this theory was a simple answer to many medical questions. 
2. Ideology 
- Many people had societal beliefs that the world was comprised of the four elements. when the theory of the four humors arose, it was easy to connect this theory to their pre-existing ideologies. 
3. Emotional connection 
- Because this theory connects with peoples illnesses and the negative results that may result from these illnesses, people may have been more inclined to believe this theory because it could potentially help cure loved ones of their illnesses. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:14:03 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836724 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836944 1. Appeal to authority
- Many people believe things when they come from respected and educated people, such as doctors, and because doctors were the only ones with medical knowledge at the time, what they said was usually not questioned. 
2. All natural 
- Doctors claimed that these four humors were natural parts of the human body. As long as they were kept balanced, by doing things in moderation, you would not get ill 

]]> 2016-03-28 01:20:18 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102836944 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837221 2016-03-28 01:28:15 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837221 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837262 This is a theory that states that there is a "fire-like" element present in all "combustible bodies". It was believed to be what makes things burn. Some things, such as charcoal had a higher amount of phlogiston because it left little residue after burning, where as things such as wood, which has a lower phlogiston content, left more residue. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:28:57 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837262 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837595 1. Simplicity 
- People did not have scientific knowledge, so therefore this theory was an easy to understand answer. 
2. Unexplained
- People had no way of explaining what happened when an object burned, so like above, this was a way of explaining that. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:33:41 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837595 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837732 1. Appeal to authority 
- The people that were endorsing this theory to be true were typically well respected scientists, which may have swayed people into believing this theory. 

]]> 2016-03-28 01:35:35 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837732 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837831 - A flaw of this theory is that some elements weigh more after they burn than they did before. An example of this is mercury. If this theory was true, there should be less weight after burning because the phlogiston would have been released. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:37:42 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837831 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837952 2016-03-28 01:40:15 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102837952 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838081 Bloodletting is the theory that draining the body of large amounts of blood would cure the body of any illness it had. It was created as a result of growth in the belief of the four humors, and was practiced for over 2,000 years. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:42:11 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838081 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838380 1. Simplicity
- Like many other historical medicinal theories, this may have simply been an understandable answer to difficult medical questions, especially due to the lack of medical knowledge available. 
2. Emotional connection
- People may have believed this theory in the hope that if it were true, they would be able to better care for sick loved ones, even though in reality it may have done more damage to them. ]]> 2016-03-28 01:48:21 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838380 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838511 1. Appeal to authority 
- People believed in this theory because doctors and other respected individuals were endorsing it to be true. 
2. Ancient wisdom
- This theory is based on the ancient belief of the four elements, which may make people more inclined to believe it.
3. All natural 
- This method of "healing" used all natural methods instead of medicines and different chemicals ]]> 2016-03-28 01:51:42 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838511 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838767 - A flaw with this theory is that if someone looses too much blood, they will have severe negative consequences. If doctors took too much blood, the opposite of what they were trying to achieve would occur]]> 2016-03-28 01:58:58 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838767 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838872 2016-03-28 02:01:40 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102838872 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839195 This theory states that human settlement had an impact on the weather of a certain geographical location. It was believed that this allowed people to settle on more arid areas. ]]> 2016-03-28 02:09:26 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839195 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839229 1. Patternicity 
- People may have believed they say the pattern of more rainfall where they relocated/resettled. 
2. Perception/observation
- When people located, they most likely observed more rainfall in the location they moved to. However, this may not have been a result of the rain "following" them, but simply because they observed it first hand - they perceived that there was more rainfall. ]]> 2016-03-28 02:10:14 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839229 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839731 1. Confirmation bias 
- people may have noticed "more rain" but in reality, they only noticed the days that it rained and not the days it didnt rain. ]]> 2016-03-28 02:23:26 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839731 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839848 - A flaw to this theory is that when people resettled to more arid places, the weather did not change. ]]> 2016-03-28 02:25:50 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102839848 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840164 2016-03-28 02:35:52 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840164 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840182 Maternal impression is the theory "that a pregnant woman’s experiences are directly imprinted on her unborn child". This was the theory that people used to explain why children were born with certain birth defects or characteristics. People believed that a mothers thoughts or actions would impact the unborn child. ]]> 2016-03-28 02:36:17 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840182 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840416 1. Simplicity 
- Because there was very little information about prenatal care and the effects a mothers actions can/cannot have on a child, this was an easy answer to inexplicable things such as birth defects ]]> 2016-03-28 02:43:19 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840416 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840575 1. Confirmation bias
- Confirmation bias may be present because people notice coincidences more than they do not. They may be mistaking coincidences for this theory 
2. Confusion of correlation with causation 
- People may have been confusing the connection between a mothers actions and the child's characteristics as being the cause of these characteristics. ]]> 2016-03-28 02:47:25 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102840575 bird_neill65 https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102846160 2016-03-28 05:12:24 UTC https://padlet.com/bird_neill65/digakwrlz6f9/wish/102846160