[adorno]

All theories will either remain theories or be discarded. There is nothing higher than "theory". Nothing in science is ever "proven".

Beyond theory there might be a 'law' of nature. But, you stated it yourself, a theory can be discarded. Why would that be? Could it be that new explanations to observations were found, or measurements proved a theory to actually be wrong? If a theory stands a chance of being proved wrong, then it merits to be called a 'speculation' rather than a theory.

And, since I'm not very religious, if at all, I can't rightly consider myself a creationist. And, since I haven't observed and 'intelligent designer' at work, I can't consider myself and "ID" advocate either.

I was at one time a heavy believer of evolution theory. It made a lot of sense. But, as science progresses and the complexities of life are discovered, I become more and more skeptical of the theory and convinced that 'evolution theory' will never answer the questions of life and how it started and how it really 'evolved', if it evolved at all.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"Beyond theory there might be a 'law' of nature."

There might be, but there isn't.

[ThinkDifferent]

But, you stated it yourself, a theory can be discarded. Why would that be? Could it be that new explanations to observations were found, or measurements proved a theory to actually be wrong?

Exactly.

If a theory stands a chance of being proved wrong, then it merits to be called a 'speculation' rather than a theory.

Utterly and completely wrong. By that standard there is nothing in science that isn't "speculation".

[Dimensio]

Beyond theory there might be a 'law' of nature.

No, "laws" are not "beyond" theories. Laws are a different kind of statement, fitting a different purpose.

But, you stated it yourself, a theory can be discarded. Why would that be?

Typically a theory is discarded when observations occur that directly contradict implications made by the theory.

Could it be that new explanations to observations were found, or measurements proved a theory to actually be wrong?

Yes, this would be grounds for discarding a theory. On the other hand, sometimes the theory might be "wrong" on minor details, but not proven wrong at what it fundamentally explains. In those cases the theory is adjusted to take into account the new information.

If a theory stands a chance of being proved wrong, then it merits to be called a 'speculation' rather than a theory.

By your reasoning, everything in science is "speculation" because absolutely everything in all of science is subject to change should contrary observations occur.