Is it possible, when investigating past events, to use the scientific method? In other words, is it possible to present an hypothesis for the cause(s) of a specific event, and identify a way to test this hypothesis?

Identify for your term paper an event in Earth or life history that took place in prehistoric times, and present at least one hypothesis which has been subjected to testing by scientific research.  Your bibliography should include two primary literature sources (i.e. original scientific articles): one study that presents the hypothesis and a second study that attempts to test it.  In many cases, an original hypothesis typically generates many follow-up studies, some of which support and others which invalidate the proposed cause or process or which reveal some flaws in the hypothesis. Sometimes, an improved  understanding of a process operating today forces us to re-evaluate a hypothesis that was plausible when it was first proposed.

Identify clearly in your paper:
- the scientific evidence for the event chosen
  (What traces has the event left? When did it take place?)
- the hypothesis presented to explain the cause of the event
- the physical component, i.e. a non-biological process, of the cause
- the evidence supporting the hypothesis originally proposed
- does the original author indicate how the hypothesis might be tested?
- one follow-up study (primary literature) which tested the hypothesis
    - describe the principle of the method chosen for testing the thypothesis
    - report the conclusion of the follow-up study
- add your conclusion: how well do you think your example illustrates the application of the scientific method?

A topic (which you cannot choose) but which would fit the objectives listed above is the scientific determination of the absolute age of the Earth. A student choosing this topic could include the following elements in the term paper:
- the event chosen: the formation of the Earth, a very long time ago.
- evidence for this statement: thickness of sedimentary rocks found in many places on Earth.
- the nature of the hypothesis proposed by Lord Kelvin: the Earth formed 20-40 millions of years ago (p. 164 in textbook)
- age can be calculated from current heat flow is it is the result of heat loss by cooling of magma that formed the Earth
- evidence cited by Kelvin which supported his hypothesis:
  igneous rock formed from magma, heat flow increases with depth, cooling of deep magma still continues to this day
- the only test that Kelvin could propose were heat flow measurements across the planet and at various depths within the Earth's crust because he didn't suspect that any other process could account for this internal heat
- follow-up studies invalidated his hypothesis by determining much older absolute ages for some of Earth's rocks
- Kelvin's hypothesis was tested by radiometric dating of rocks containing radioactive elements
- conclusions:
    - the Earth's crust contains significant quantities of these elements
    - this natural radioactive decay releases a considerable amount of energy as heat
    - conclusion: the cooling rate of the Earth is considerably slower than if it had no natural radioactivity.
- the student should add his own personal commentary as a conclusion... In this case, a plausible scientific hypothesis was presented, but it was tested by a method that Kelvin could not have predicted. The later discovery and understanding of radioactive decay provided a tool for absolute dating of igneous rocks, and explained why Kelvin's age was too low.

Another topic, which blends biology and physical geology, might be the origin of the banded iron formations.  They formed in abundance only in Precambrian times. One hypothesis is that they represent chemical sinks which slowed down the rise of oxygen produced by photosynthetic prokaryotes in the atmosphere. The hypothesis is still being tested by scientists studying other indicators of the presence of atmospheric oxygen. You might discover a study indicating that bacteria that do not photosynthesize could have produced the BIFs in an oxygen-poor ocean. Your conclusion might be that this remains an unsolved problem. Contradictory evidence and arguments show the limitation of the scientific method when we apply ideas inspired by present-day life forms to times where anoxic bacteria were far more widespread than they are today.

Your outline should include the "skeleton" of your term paper, i.e. the most important aspects in point form.
- indicate briefly why you have chosen the topic (personal interest, controversial and abundant information, event judged particularly significant)
- what is the event in question
- what is the nature of the evidence (physical, biological) for the event?
- what is the hypothesis presented?
- which study (primary or secondary literature) presented this evidence and a hypothesis?
- how does the hypothesis lend itself to testing?
- what is the study (primary or secondary literature) that tests the hypothesis?
- self-evaluation: what elements of your topic make it relevant to the theme of the term paper?
- bibliography where you indicate the sources of information that you have used so far; label these sources as primary (evidence is collected and analyzed by the authors), secondary (evidence is discussed but it was collected by others, whose work is referenced) or tertiary literature (no direct reference to primary sources of information).

20% clarity of presentation of the event and evidence (e.g., data supporting its occurrence or timing).
20% clarity of presentation of the hypothesis.
20% clarity of presentation of a test of the hypothesis.
15% quality of language: spelling, syntax, proper use of terms.
10% quality of your evaluation of how well the studies illustrates the scientific method.
10% bibliography: proper citation style, at least 2 primary/secondary literature sources.
  5% adjustments made in response to problems spotted on original outline (0% if no outline is submitted).