My understanding of string theory is certainly very, very limited. But I don't think it's exactly right to say it "lacks a single shred of evidence." It may and may not have evidence. True, there are few if any tests, yet, that that back it up.
I'm not claiming string theory is wrong (heck, I don't even understand the math), but it goes back 30 years and has not yet framed a set of experiments that might provide support. For all of the elegance of the math and all of the many bright people in the field, I'd say that even using the term 'Theory' is a stretch. As bizarre as strings might be, they could provide a deeper understanding of the universe. But only if we can test. We demand evidence of the ID/creationist crowd (I'm not holding my breath), and we must hold string theorists to the same high standard. This isn't even the argument Don was afraid of stirring up ;-)