So its a possibility with proof that is ever changing until enough proof comes along to make it a law. It is not a law so it is just a possibility with a lot of evidence behind it.

No. Did you even read it?

Yes and that was what it said. I've also studied it and that is what I've came to the conclusion and have had professors tell me every time. One once told me that there is a discrepancy where people misunderstand theories as laws but that makes no sense because then we would have no need for a difference. He said that a law is concrete, its set in stone, its the way something is. A theory is like play doh where it is constantly changing. Theories still holds true or untested facts to an incomplete law so they cannot be completely held as the truth yet. To say that a scientific theory is the truth is like spreading the word about the outcome of a trial before the jury has found a verdict on the matter. The discrepancy he was talking about is how people say that theories are true when they are not. They have facts that are true but not enough facts to add up to making the theory itself true. People are like, "well the facts are true so that means this whole thing is true," which is wrong.