Well, no. Not really, here is a link to a site written by sceintist regarding induction and falsification:
undsci.berkeley.edu
"Induction — method of reasoning in which a generalization is argued to be true based on individual examples that seem to fit with that generalization. For example, after observing that trees, bacteria, sea anemones, fruit flies, and humans have cells, one might inductively infer that all organisms have cells."
"Falsification — the view, associated with philosopher Karl Popper, that evidence can only be used to rule out ideas, not to support them. Popper proposed that scientific ideas can only be tested through falsification, never through a search for supporting evidence."
Combine those 2 and you get that it is both true and not that all organisms have cells.
It depends on how you view the different concepts in science.
So in the strong sense, for the example that the earth rotates around its axis, it is not true that it will do so tomorrow, if you go by Popper. If you go by induction, it is true that it also will do so tomorrow.
And thus we have 2 versions of even natural science.