The much applauded and controversial 'Big Bang Theory' is not a theory. It is an hypothesis. The much applauded and controversial 'Super String Theory' is not a theory. It is an hypothesis. (Please refer, Webster's dictionary, or, any dictionary of scientific terms.) These importantly expansive misunderstandings negatively influence and handicap the entire world of contemplation at the foundations of objective thinking. These endlessly repeated misnomers sustain themselves. Calling hypotheses 'theories' is unscientific and misleading, digressive and harmful. Would I be banned - or omitted from posting - for tactfully pointing this out? (In some cases I already have been). Is there no room for a cordial fireside chat about such - very important, fundamental, symptomatic - 'misunderstandings' (Resting comfortably in the center of 'Standard Theory'; expanding tolerance thresholds on the foundations of academia)? Are they not plaintively germane to the influence of scientists on public acceptance, controversy tolerance, perspective, science, art, fiction and culture?