Yes, a theory is something that isn't proven, but has enough evidence to suggest. This is why continental drift ISN'T proven, as it is clearly refered to as a theory. I don't care how much information we have, because I think that we have many things backwards to begin with. Anyways, I just thought that I would point out that continental drift still isn't proven, even if the greatest percent of the scientific community likes to think it has been.
XchrononetX, you appear to have some wrongheaded ideas about how science works. If my link did not enlighten you, I will continue.
I'm going to philosophize a little bit. In the real world, it is impossible to prove anything. Our view of the universe is limited by what our senses can detect and the ability of our minds to analyze that data. There is no way to verify whether what we see or hear is real, let alone if the invisible things we accept as true really exist.
Science is our attempt to take the limited data our senses supply to us and figure out what we are looking at. Science never claims to prove anything—that would be absurd, considering that we don't know whether we really exist or not. Science takes what we have already observed, and tries to predict what will happen next. If those predictions are accurate, they become a theory, and it will be generally accepted by scientists as what actually happens. However, if the theory ever contradicts what is observed, it must be either revised or discarded. If a theory lasts long enough, scientists may call it a law, but that doesn't mean it cannot be falsified.
Mathematics is different. It is a conceptual universe which we created—and we know
ALL the rules. It is possible to use the basic axioms of mathematics to prove a logical expression, and know with absolute certainty that it is true.
Continental Drift is not a certainty and it will never be proven, but it is supported by every scientific observation of the earth. Scientists to not think that Continental Drift is just a swell idea, they recognize that it is the only present explanation that fits the data.
Because the data is not complete and will never be complete does not invalidate the theory. You have done nothing to falsify Continental Drift or the theory of Plate Tectonics. How agreeable you find Continental Drift or any other theory is completely irrelevant, and has no place in a discussion in this forum.
