Accepting uncertainty in Science

Science is about uncertainty, it could be argued that is the very foundation of it, the premise behind falsifying something is all its about.  Religion, and various other beliefs tend to give the idea of certainty, and this is why many people have problems with scientific information I think. You see science is about using the uncertain to make it more certain, but that certainty is never ever reachable.  There is never a hundred percent certainty in anything, and if the argument is made that one must have that hundred percent, you must acknowledge that it must apply to all scientific endeavors, because that is what all science is, uncertainty.  Science is the constant attempt to reach the hundred percent level, but never reaches that hundred percent, and all that attempt is backed by real experiments in the real world, in other words is tested with stuff that functions in this world. So with that we get some percentage of uncertainty  vs. certainty, the most 'true' is the one with highest ratio of certainty vs. uncertainty. 

So with that in mind, all the technology in the entire world, all we know and see and understand, all the new power we have in this universe is based on this uncertainty engine. A engine that has given a great deal of certainty, but don't interpret that certainty as absolute, only faith gives absolute certainty.

So why do people say that things like climate change somehow have less certainty then other science which we base our current world?  It is I feel because they do not understand what role uncertainty has in science, they treat it as they would a belief, if there is any uncertainty then it is automatically wrong (and so far they believe the science they depend on is hundred percent so far as their world view works on),  they do not  understand that science is not about a hundred percent certainty, nor does a degree of uncertainty automatically invalidate the greate amount of certainty of  many thousands of experiements and years of data.

So it must be impressed to people that uncertainty is a part of science, it is what makes it tick, and that certain amount of uncertainty is normal in all science.

An addendum for those arguing climate change, don't just say x climatologists say this is valid, as it makes the public think its one group, nor the Intergovernmental panel of x says this, again they think one group. Its bettter to say x  climatologists, x biologist, x geologists, x  group, y group, z group. That way they understand the number of people who support it with research, and not just some small group of people that they would think would be partial to some conspiracy. It's much harder if you impress the numbers and  varied spectrum of scientists who see evidence of climate change.