Those who equivocate science with truth are either ignorant or disingenuous.

The scientific method is iterative in nature and relies on constant openness to challenging current wisdom. Strict adherence to "science" is no different than strict adherence to "religion". Both conservative orientations can result in obstacles to change.

There are too many examples when scientific "certainty" resulted in more harm than good.

For example, in the middle of the 20th century, it was common practice to use nasopharyngeal irradiation to treat hearing loss, tonsillitis, allergies, etc. This practice continued for decades until researchers drew a correlation between these treatments and a significant increase in thyroid cancer and related disease. Millions were subject to this "therapy" and suffered the consequences. In my case hypothyroidism and vocal fold cancer. If science were perfect, there would be no need for medical second opinions.

The scientific method produces conclusions that must be reexamined periodically to see if they pass the test of time. Quickening scientific discovery driven by advances in technology means shorter timeframes between iterative cycles. This means we must be open to reconsideration daily.

It's no surprise to me that there are sceptics to prevailing scientific conclusions about climate change, COVID mitigation, etc. To the extent that we disparage and marginalize those sceptics, we ignore the truth that prevailing scientific conclusions can, and have been wrong in the past and will be in the future.

The end result is not progress, it's a stalemate. Respectful, principled open debate is the path to progress.