Let me clear up a few misconceptions you have. All scientific theroies, even the laws you mention, are not proven. There are no proven theories in science. Also, a scientific theory, by definition, can never be a fact. A scientific theory is an explanation for observed facts. It is the narrative that explains the observed facts. It is impossible to prove a theory. Scientific theories can only be disproven through the accumulation of facts that do not support the arguments of the theory. If newly obtained facts do not fit the established theoretical framework, then either the theory has to be modified (i.e. Newtonian physics extended to relativistic physics) or a newer theory, with more sufficient explanative properties, must be constructed. Evolution fits this definition of a scientific theory. It is testable and has been supported by predicted observations.
To elevate theories to the status of laws implies a willingness to atribute far more weight to the lowly hypothesis than is warranted.
Based on your additional statemetns regarding theories and hypotheses, you, like many people, are not scientifically literate. A hypothesis is a testable prediction that will produce additional observed facts. The results of thousands of testable hypotheses have been used to generate the facts that are used to construct theories. In the heirarchy of science: hypotheses are used to produce facts. The observed facts are organized under theories.
Make of that what you will, but as a scientist, the refusal to state that any theory is fact is entirely scientifically correct.
You are correct, but for the wrong reasons as I've listed above.
Once you prove a theory, it is no longer a theory, it is a Law.
If you maintain that no theory can be proven, then quit trying to sell me evolutionary theory as fact.
Is evolution testable? If so where are the new species? Live ones, of course, not just more fossils. After all if evolution is working, new species should be developing all the time. Hmmmm. Maybe next year.
If you wish to play games by redefining terms, have fun, but do not call me a scientific illiterate as a result.
I took a year of paleontology as an undergrad, a very good course (two courses, actually), geared toward the evolutionary development of the phyla, not just taxonomy, and taught by an avowed atheist. The theory is as full of holes as the rock in this oil reservoir we are drilling.
BTW, my raw score on the Geology GRE was 720. Not bad for a "scientific illiterate".
Now, excuse me, but I have to get back to work.