Question

Scientific consensus supports the idea that living organisms require oxygen. Then, a scientist discovers a type of bacteria that metabolizes sulfur instead of oxygen, and thus survives in environments without oxygen. The scientist concludes that a diverse group of many different organisms could live in an oxygen-free environment. Why should are some scientists skeptical of the scientist’s results and conclusion?

Answer 1

That doesn't mean a diverse group of many different organisms could live that way.

Step-by-step explanation:

First of all, this is a theory, nothing else. This means that they are no strong evidence and events that support this. Another important point is that scientists discover a type of BACTERIA, nothing else, which means that the living organism with this nature is unicellular, it's not a complex organism like multicellular. However, they conclude that a DIVERSE GROUP can live without oxygen, which is a lie, they are speculating.

Answer 2

The results are different from the scientific consensus.

Step-by-step explanation:

on edge