<p>Hi. I am an international student, so I cannot get help from home. Please, tell me if I am on the right track.</p>
<p>Statement:</p>
<p>Think carefully about the issue presented in the following excerpt and the assignment below.</p>
<p>Some people believer that there is only one foolproof plan, perfect solution, or correct interpretation. But nothing is ever that simple. For better or worse, for every so-called final answer there is another way of seeing things. There is always a 'however'.</p>
<p>Assignment: Is there always another explanation or another point of view? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations.</p>
<p>Here it comes:</p>
<p>No issue has a standard explanation. Though people usually are acquainted with a single solution to a problem, that does not mean there are no other points of view. Seeking for the secrets behind natural phenomena, scientists throughout history have come up with more than one theory to explain certain issues.</p>
<p>Sometimes, an explanation appeals so much to the public, that any attempt from a different angle is dismissed. Regarding the apparition of man on Earth, the ancient world had no doubt that the Creationism theory was true. This is why, when Charles Darwin first presented the Evolutionism theory, nobody believed him. Today, while this theory is hunanimously accepted, archeological discoveries have revealed several man-made objects dated from the dinosaur era, which contradicts it. Probably a new theory is being developed. So we cannot say there is a perfect theory.</p>
<p>In other cases, a theory encounters practical aspects it cannot explain. When it happens, a new theory has to be developed. This is why the succession of atomic models has appeared. As soon as the Rutherford model could not explain the nucleus stability, Bohr developed a new one. However, because it only explained the behavior of nuclei with a single electron, it was soon replaced with the quantum model. We are unable to view the atom structure, so these models are never to be completely confirmed.</p>
<p>There are also situations when several theories reach the same conclusion. Both the Molecular Orbital Theory and the Bond Valence Theory correctly explain the geometry of molecules. While the former assumes that atomic orbitals form a single group of molecular orbitals with different energies, the latter states that each atom changes its orbital energy to overlap with other orbitals. Although their approach is different, the result is always the same geometry.</p>
<p>As science reveals, an issue can be attached from different points of view. Whether a second method is completely inovative, covers certain imprecisions or simply functions as well as the first, it will always show up. We can never reach unanimity.</p>