Big difference -- scientists have been working on the ToE for over a hundred years, and have not yet been able to show it to be wrong.
ID is not a scientific theory. The only thing scientific about it are individual scientific attacks on the ToE, and they have failed as have all previous attacks by regular scientists (which is why ToE exists today). But a set of scientific attacks on an established theory do not in themselves equal a scientific theory.
Of course not. All the evidence related to the big picture is circumstantial. Even in a judicial context circumstantial evidence is not exactly held in high regard. Why do evolutionists have to elevate circumstantial evidence to the level of certitude not warranted, and then go on to insist their version of history is worthy of an exclusive hearing in public schools? Again, evolution has only been directly observed within limits. Extrapolations from there qualify better as philosophies of history than as science.
ID is not a scientific theory.
Spoken frequently and fervently, to be sure. Yet there are ample examples of directly observed intelligent design, which makes the process far from necessarily "supernatural" and beyond the purview of science.