Misunderstanding, ignorance, what difference right? As long as I can be of service.
I usually just say the old “Scientific theory is not equal to bar room speculation type theory.” I felt a link would be better though.
As for the theory standing untill proven wrong, a major part of a science is that science does not prove anything, only offers evidence of something, and a key point of science is that it is falsifiable. Meaning it is waiting for something to come along and prove it wrong.
Well, it is a far cry from saying “it isn’t proven” to, “although it isn’t proven (i.e not falsifiable), there are volumes of evidence supporting it.” Now a days there is enough evidence to support theories named above to erase all doubt in the minds of those that care learn the material.
I GET IT. Really. What is this, Tease the Foreigner day? The theories of Continental Drift and Plate Tectonics are a tad newer than the Theory of Gravity anyway… fuck it. Consider me corrected and ridiculed.
UselessGit, the problem you have (which is quite common by the way) is that you are confusing the words “theory” and “hypothesis”.
In common speech, when you say “I have a theory”, that means you’re not so sure. It’s not a total guess, but it’s not fact either.
In a scientific context, though, this is called a “hypothesis”.
A theory consists of taking a bunch of individual facts and observations and arranging them in a coherent whole.
When we’re talking about evolution theory, for instance, evolution, DNA, etc. aren’t questioned - those are observations, facts. What the theory tries to do is show how these observations are related.
Theories are never “upgraded” to something more certain.