When you throw the religion word at scientiphic philosophy, one, it makes no sense, and two, it's designed as a pejorative against the person with whom you are having the argument. You and I both know this and I'm calling it for what it is.
If you use the word determistic to mean that there is a perfect contingency between an antecedent event and its consequence (e.g., release a ball held from a given height and it will fall, and that it will fall at a given rate every time) then you are using the word differently than I and the community of biological scientists use the word. Sciences are not 90% deterministic or 32% deterministic.
As you pointed out climate scientists cannot say that on the 3rd of July, 2066, a megacyclone will hit New Orleans. Does that therefore mean that weather patterns are not happening as they are due to the sun's effects in combination with the host of systems on the planet? You are confusing current understanding and the state of predictive modeling with determinism. The natural order of our universe couldn't care less about our predictive powers, and our limitations in this area is not evidence of a creative Mind or mind.