I don't call it String Theory.  In no way has any form of it ever been put to a test of its validity.  It is a hypothesis... <<

I could not agree with this more. Preying on the public's poor grasp of truth test in science, too many "popularizers", not to mention actual supposed scientists, clap the word "theory" on a hypothesis, thus cheapening the term 'Theory", which i am sure most in this thread know should only be applied to that which has been very vigorously tested and attacked, with not only experiments repeated by others, but predictions that could not otherwise have been attained, the entire body of connected knowlege vetted by the rational community as a whole. Contrary to postmodern theory [sarcasm intended], there is such a thing as certainty, and the word "Theory" should ONLY be applied to knowlege that is certain.

While there are many foisting this error on our culture, I hold the smarmy Brian Green particularily in contempt.

Thanks for making that point k.

:: og ::

P.S. Have you noticed a consequence? As a result of the cheapening of "Theory", kids nowadays can easily dismiss hard fact (in favor of radical skepticism that no truth can ipso facto be 'hard') with the tossed-off phrase, "Well, evolution (or fill in the blank) is ONLY a theory."