Thats not a theory, thats a prediction. Theories only deal with past events. Answer: false.

False, it could also explain current or previous events.

True. A theory must predict future observations in its field, even though these observations might be of long past events, like the discovery of a new kind of fossil or the imaging of a distant galaxy whose light it left billions of years earlier. I predict that if you hold up tomorrow's newspaper and then let go of it, it will fall to the floor. I am applying applying Newton's theory to predict the outcome of an event that hasn't taken place yet involving an object that doesn't exist yet. Indeed, the most successful and robust scientific theories (atomic theory, quantum theory, thermodynamics, evolution, relativity, etc.) are known for their repeated consistency with new observations. In this manner, the mountains of evidence supporting these theories grows. No theory is 100% successful at explaining new observations, however, which is how the cutting edge moves forward and how scientific theories often get minor revisions and (less often) major revisions. Other theories make sense at first, but then fail in their predictions. For instance, an early atomic theory had the positive and negative charges spread out across the atom. This theory was demolished when Rutherford discovered that an atom's positive charge is concentrated in a central nucleus. Ever hear of Thompson's "plum pudding" model? Probably not, since it turned out to be wrong -- it made incorrect predictions about the outcomes of Rutherford's experiments with alpha rays and got replaced instead with nuclear physics. And so it goes in science... Just don't expect any theory to give you next week's winning lottery numbers! Obviously the future CANNOT be predicted in that sense.