If you can separate "philosophy of science" from "science, "
there must be something wrong with either the philosophy or the science.
The examples you quote are cases where scientific inquiry has led to
results that are almost certain (99.999%, for example). They could,
nevertheless, be falsified (in the Popperian sense) by one new finding,
which in these cases, of course, is less likely than winning that 500
Million dollar prize. Take evolution, for example, which people have
claimed to be non-falsifiable. Nonsense. Every time a paleontologist
diggs for fossils, there is a chance that he might find dinosaur
footprints together with human ones (as is falsely claimed by some
of our detractors). Everytime, this does NOT happen (or something
similarly incongruent), evolution "theory" gets another boost and
increases the likelihood of its correctness which, by now, is
overwhelming. But I must agree with "Saint" Popper that scientific
knowledge is never 100% sure, but that it approaches that ideal in
many cases by only an infinitimely small fraction of 1%. What other human
endeavor can you say that about?? Therefore, here is to Science!!!