Science is model building, nothing more, nothing less.
Models to predict outcomes with. As long as the outcomes are predictable it's established as a fact.
But these predictions are always temporary that is the very basic principle of the scientific method as put forward by Popper. In other words you can never do enough testing to establish something to be universally true.
The problem with Poppers method is his tendency to see the scientific method as something with a direction. I.e. we build knowledge to gain better and better and increasingly more true understanding of our world.
The article shows exactly the limits of testing. You can even for a very long time and repeatedly have the same outcomes just until you don't have them anymore. We have no way of knowing whether our observations of various phenomena are universal or simply just some patterns that happen to be true for a limited time (even if we talk millions of years)
And that is ok. Just as we make assumptions in our personal lives that are true for some time until they fall apart. (housing market, pension funds, that death sure job, marriage)
Life's complicated and we never know what it will turn up with. I find that part of why it's great to live.