Not true. It is possible to falsify bad science with good science without ever having to provide an explanation of the same. For instance, there have been a number of diseases that were thought to be contagious that were proved to be non-contagious without knowing the underlying cause of the disease (ie scurvy, pallegra, beri-beri, etc). This kind of thing happens all the time in science. And in many cases, science cannot provide the explanation until much later.
Causes for specific diseases are not well-supported theories, as is the theory of evolution. Your comparison is not accurate.
To overturn the theory of evolution, it will require a competing scientific theory with more explanatory power, power to explain facts which the theory of evolution cannot explain. It will require a theory with better predictive power.
Hint: ID is not even close to being a scientific theory. For the most part it is not even science.
Lets try a test! What is the opinion of ID on these questions: How may IDers where there, and what is the basis for your answer? When did ID occur, and what is the basis for your answer?
==To overturn the theory of evolution, it will require a competing scientific theory with more explanatory power, power to explain facts which the theory of evolution cannot explain. It will require a theory with better predictive power.
Wrong again. All you need to do is falsify Darwin’s theory of origins. There’s no need to replace it. Although, it would by definition mean that we are closer to replacing it if only by process of elimination.
==Hint: ID is not even close to being a scientific theory.
Again, there is no need for ID to comprehensively explain the origin of life. If all ID does is find incidences of design in nature, that’s enough. SETI does not seek to to explain the origin of species, and yet it is considered a scientific research project. And besides, ID disproves Darwinian evolution every time it shows that design is a better explanation for any given biological phenomena.