Just an example of what I mean for evolution:
Evolution states that all organisms arose from some common ancestor. This implies that all organisms should have a common molecular basis for genetic material. We know that humans use nucleic acids as their genetic material. Therefore, evolution predicts that any newly found organism should have nucleic acids as its genetic material. If a new organism is observed that uses some other molecule as its genetic material, this would cause evolution to be found to be false. Give me a similar example using ID as a basic principle.
First off, there is nothing in your example that precludes the development of "all organisms on Earth" as coming from a common ancestor from the design boards of an intelligent agent. I think we both understand the sorts design processes and decisions that would go into that sort of project. This isn't to say that life on Earth did begin that way, but the fact that we can define the methods and requirements for doing the job means that it very well could have been a product of design.
Second, there is no need to assume (as your question seems to imply) that intelligent designers had to be active at all steps in the process from "first organism" to human. The two processes could very well work in parallel, with "intelligent interference" being a relatively rare and localized thing. We easily understand this, because it's how we humans practice intelligent design.
Therefore, evolution predicts that any newly found organism should have nucleic acids as its genetic material. If a new organism is observed that uses some other molecule as its genetic material, this would cause evolution to be found to be false.
You need to be very careful when making statements like this one. It's a mistake to equate an information storage medium with the process of evolution. There is no reason to assume that evolution would be disproved because genetic information was encoded in some different form. (Indeed, I think the case for evolution might well be strengthened by it....) For example, "computer-based life" is in some sense possible even today, and it doesn't use nucleic acids to transmit "genetic information." The lack of DNA clearly does not preclude the possibility that "computer-based life" could change through evolutionary processes.
Give me a similar example using ID as a basic principle.
Still not sure what you're asking here, as you have yet to define "ID" in an unambiguous manner, in terms of both its scope and characteristics. Are we talking about ID in the sense of the folks who spliced a jellyfish gene into monkey DNA? That was clearly a case of intelligent design.