Multiple observations and experiments will help us create more accurate inferences. By having more data we have more evidence to back up our inferences. When we were doing the fiber case recorded three drawings of one fiber so we could have more evidence to back up our inference. In the soil lab we tested the conductivity the Ph and the water absorption for each soil in order to prove our conclusion. In the firearms we measured the grooves, lands, weight etc so we could have more observations to use as evidence. This is an example of how the more observations and trials you have the more accurate your conclusion will be in each case.

It was hard to be completely precise in all of the labs. By adding a human variable to an experiment it's impossible to always be precise. Therefore it's hard to be confident about results when you're not sure if it's completely precise. In order to be confident about your results you need to do multiple test and trials to be completely back up your conclusion. For example in the fibers lab you do three drawing of each fiber just in case one of the recordings in wasn't completely precise. In the firearm lab it was also hard to be completely precise. Sometimes it was unclear which were the grooves and which were the lands. However, you can rely on making multiple observations and trials to completely and accurately prove your answer.

You can rely on "known" data to match up with your own when you want to prove your conclusion. For example in the caliber lab you had a chart that you could compare your measurements with in order to find where the bullets came from and also whether your measurements where accurate. It was clear that this information reliable because it wasn't just an inference it was scientific. The caliber lab was the only lab that you could rely on "known" data to match up with. On the other labs you had to generate you own data to compare with the crime scene data. You had to generate this data because it’s different for each crime scene. Unlike the calibers lab there isn’t recorded data you can use.

Blood splatter lab 1

By dropping multiple drops at each height we could create a more accurate diameter of a drop by finding the average. If we just did one trial then we can't be sure that was the most accurate drop. I think for the most part the diameter increased as you went up in height. The data was sometimes a little random, but in most groups their largest diameter was in the highest height. I think I could have a good idea about how high height at which a blood drop originated based on the diameter. However, I don't know how accurate or precise it would be because the diameters of different group's drop differed. The drops weren't exactly the same diameter at the same height some weren't even close to others.