On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:48:50 -0500, Stan Pawlukiewicz
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Jerry Avins wrote:
>> Stan Pawlukiewicz wrote:
>>
>>> Jerry Avins wrote:
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> Only theories that can generate testable predictions are properly
>>>> subjects of science.
>>>
>>>
>>> How about string theory?
>>
>>
>> String theory is now in its infancy. People find it interesting and are
>> exploring its ramifications. If none of that leads ultimately to a
>> testable prediction, it will fade away.
>>
>> Jerry
>
>So it should not be mentioned in any public school science class,
>because it really isn't a science yet. It might be interpreted as the
>establishment of a pasta deity.
>

String theory is a speculative theory. But it's scientific because it
is, in principle, falsifiable.