Why does the question of whether something counts as properly "scientific" matter to questions of evidence in criminal law? what are some of the problems with applying criteria that are meant to determine whether something is a science in court cases?

Whether something counts as scientific evidence in criminal law must be taken into careful consideration, since once a proof is established as scientific it becomes an authority argument.

Explanation:

If one considers a piece of evidence as scientific it becomes a strong foundation to validify that line of thought. Even the scientific method can be biased and a misguided approach to a piece of information, statistics or physical evidence can be decisive to the turn out of a court case.

recent improvements in technology/telecommunication/internet have increased the pace of globalization.

explanation:

recent improvements in technology have enhanced the pace of globalization. it is not difficult to recognize that technology has created the human race one big issue. there are several aspects to technology but they all serve to meet us the further. i can beat and be friends with a fellow, thousands of miles away. technology has also bridged the knowledge gap and has presented for the ready transfer of ideas and values.