>Thanks for the above.
>
>I'd always heard that "theory", as a scientific term rather than a 'folk' expression, was: a viable hypothesis with a preponderance of evidence.
>
>So it is a misnomer to say "it's just a theory" in effort to refute or dismiss the science, agreed? Like we would not say "Gravity: a theory, not a fact". Evolution is a central an unifying theory to the whole body of life sciences. That it "can't be proven" really means that we can't convince are those who do not accept it.

I would suggest you look up the remaining definitions, at www.dictionary.com.

As you can see, the range of meanings - as it is used, and as it is presented in the dictionary - can go anywhere between "solid scientific research" to "wild guess".

In the case of Evolution, and also Cosmology (the origin of the Universe) and Cosmogony (the origin of the Solar System), I would say that the general outline is there, but that certain details have to be figured out yet. In some cases, these can be important details, like (in Evolution) more details about the first step (from proteins to a cell is a much bigger step than from an amoeba to a human being), and (in Cosmology) what happened before the Big Bang, if there was a before.