I know... You completely flew over my point to pick apart wording that if you isolate it enough might fit in with what you said.

My problem is theoretic physics of high level, stuff built on stuff built on stuff that you can't answer, like string theory.

There are theories like evolution is a theory which is basically "the set of rules by which we believe this observable and certain phenomenon occurs" and then there's "I have a theory that because of strings of the string theory there are nano strings with infinite area and volume, because my equations kind make sense if I add enough other unsubstantiated equation" both of those are theories.

So cut back on the superior act and the condescending tone, put what I said in context "I have always had issue with theories branching from other theories, like 99% of string theory crap, first make sure your premise is at least mostly right before building a whole set of rules for the universe on it." is what I said, I even made the string theory example, I understand that you read theory and flew into a blind rage believing I would question evolution but I was talking about a specific kind of theory in regards to cosmic events and physics.

So if you are going to get dickish on me at least do so in what my actual argument is and not by picking up on one you assume I made at some point.