"But a simple explanation that is wrong would be worse, wouldn't it?"
Actually, no. We use simple explanations that are 'wrong' all the time. Light doesn't really travel in straight lines, but it works for everyday purposes. Newtonian mechanics has been superseded by Einsteinian physics, but the Newtonian laws still get used a lot.
If you want to replace a simple explanation with a more complex one, normal practice is to prove that the more complex explanation provides the better description of reality. That's what happened with 'wavy light' and 'Einsteinian physics'.
Otherwise, you're just replacing something that works well enough with an unproven theory. Or, in your case, with an unproven theory where the current evidence is against it.