Opinions of ideas in "Not Even Wrong" The new book by Peter Woit, Not Even Wrong, gives a lengthy discussion as to why we should abandon string theory and move to more promising fields of study. He claims, and as far as I know correctly, that superstring theory has not made one single testable prediction, but has simply stated what is already known in terms of superstrings. He cites the fact that superstrings need more dimensions than have been empirically observed to exist in order to make any sense at all as one indication of a problem. And the necessary "hiding" of seven of the required dimensions in abstract "calabi-yau" spaces as going against the Occam's Razor principle. In other words, superstring theorists have begun clutching at straws, so to speak, to make the theory true, when they should be trying to find ways to make it false, and thus testable. What are others opinions on this topic? Are superstrings, while mathematically rich, only a fanciful want of today's theorists? Or can real testable science be coaxed out it?