How is science different from other ways of learning about the world?

On a recent expedition to a remote region of northern canada, scientists uncovered skeletal remains from about 100,000 years ago. surprisingly, all the skeletal remains, which included many species from differing biological families and spanned about two thousand years, showed evidence of experiencing temperatures in excess of 1000 degrees fahrenheit (or 538 degrees celsius). which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox between the cold environment and the evidence of the bones experiencing hot temperatures? (a) chemical changes that naturally occur during the process of decay in only one north canadian species produce the same evidence of the species' skeletons being exposed to hot temperatures as the expedition scientists found. (b) a little over 103,000 years ago, a large fire is known to have occurred in northern canada. (c) strong evidence exists that as early as 70,000 years ago, homo sapiens around the world relied heavily on fire to cook animals. (d) in the same expedition and in roughly the same layer of excavation, scientists found rudimentary wood cutting and hunting tools used by early humans.

Need an answer asap 45 points and brainlest to the first person to answer why do scientific theories, such as biological and chemical evolution, represent the strongest explanation of the changes observed in the fossil record. must be in sentence form how can scientific theories on evolution and the fossil record change over time? must be in sentence form

2. how does the miller-urey experiment fall short of demonstrating that life can arise from inorganic molecules? explain. a. it doesn't show a leap between a collection of amino acids and a single-celled organism. b. it recreates the conditions that existed at the earth's beginning, but no molecules form as a result. c. it doesn't provide evidence of the formation of amino acids. d. it doesn't show how multicellular organisms developed from unicellular organisms