correct me if i am wrong alpha, when you prove a theory it is no longer a theory but a fact.
scientifically speaking, a theory is not a theory until a hypothesis is observed, tested, etc. over and over and over for a very long time. Basically, it's a fact. It's still a theory though... fact and theory are not mutually exclusive. The only reason why they're not called facts is because one, technically there is no such thing as "proof" or "facts" in science, as you can't "prove" that you are not just a brain in a jar being stimulated by electrical impulses. It's not a "fact" that the world you think exists really exists.
A theory is also not called a fact (it is accepted as fact but not called so) because by saying it's a theory, you are admitting that it can be improved or added upon. As an example, a long time ago people used to call things laws, like what's-his-name's physic's "laws". However, while that IS true for big things like planets and stuff, it's not true at the molecular level. Then einstein came about and thought up the theory of relativity (theory AND fact) that explained the "laws" further. Didn't prove them wrong, he just added to them.
or at least that's how I remember it... here's the actual source and a better explanation-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7490426/
please read my posts on the previous page and tell me what you think.
any particular post(s) you have in mind? I already told you waht I think about some parts.
i came to this board to learn by the way.
That's great, the only problem I have is that you took one little thing I said and totally dismissed the rest of that post and the others. If you think I edited the content or whatever tell me, look for sources yourself, whatever. And don't compare an AP book (basically a college textbook) with the bible.... and other things... that i already told you about.
It does you no good to take nobody's word and to be such a big skeptic. It's good to be skeptical but not so much so that you won't take any evidence.