It is easy enough to make the assumption that technological advancement comes out of the study of science. However, if one looks back at history, one sees that technological advancement was the driver for science and not the other way around.
When it boils down to it, the more we learn about the universe around us, the less we really know. There are more and more areas which we are finding that just don't fit into the existing models.
I believe that our current climate modelling efforts leave much to be desired. Planetary climate is an incredibly complex set of interactions and we have only just started to scratch the surface of those interactions. Let alone understanding what all the relationships are and how they affect all the various feedback circuits (both positive and negative feedback).
They don’t know everything but their approximations are really good for getting a lot of stuff done. That we know more and more over time is why they keep getting smaller.
If you want to reject how far we’ve come, that’s fine, but it’s a bit hypocritical to use all the medicines and high speed travel and telecommunications and the pocket supercomputer.