Science and the ladder of progression

While reading G&E Chapter 1, I very much enjoyed the footnote about molecular biologists and how uncomfortable they are with uncertainty. The funny thing is that I continually have the hard vs. soft science debate on a regular basis. My boyfriend was a biochem major who is getting his PhD in Molecular Biology. So when I get excited about what I think to be a great experimental design for some ecological phenomena, he just picks it apart. There aren't enough controls or it cannot be manipulated directly! And blah, blah, blah! It drives me crazy. I continually tell him that the study of macro organisms in biology has a lot more variation. There is much more unknown. The uncertainty drives him crazy, but I find it so interesting. It makes interpretation so much more complex and many ideas must be considered and explored. Perhaps we may never know the answer. Obnoxious or thrilling? If everything was consistent and predictable, what puzzles would we grapple with? Not that molecular biologists don't have puzzles, I just think I find them a little on the boring side.