Absolutely, the science is not conclusive about everything.
On the core question, is human activity changing the climate, there is a resounding yes. On some of the detailed impacts, like precipitation projections for the middle of large continents, the science is not conclusive.
Nonetheless, your statements "elements of the science have not been pursed with sufficient care" and "... to be effectively excluded from the climate models" are simply inaccurate. Just because the results are not conclusive, does not mean that scientists are carefully studying the problem. The disagreement in areas like precipitation forecasts reflects the depth of research and analsysis, not the lack thereof. Certainly, cloud physics is complicated, and challenging to incorporate into climate models which operate at a spatial resolution much larger than that of a cloud. But scientists have been working on this for decades. Clouds and precipitation are certainly included in the models; the models do a good job of recreating general rainfall pattens on the planet, and have taught us a lot about water vapour feedbacks.