I partly disagree. Although my reply could turn out as an affirmation!

My first thought: I disagree, because your examples are from the borders of the _possibility_ of our observations, means we have only particles and waves to measure particles and waves, means our tools to measure are as big as the measures they can't measure smaller things. We still expect that there are causes that we cannot observe, probably never can observe.

Second, we are not concerned about these non-caused events, because we can observe certain conditions of probability that these events happen.

Third, we know of these effects at the atomic level, but we expect to find relations of cause and effect at every higher level (chemical, biological, social).

Okey, that are my first and second and third thought!

But, then I remember socail and psychological events which happen without cause.

Look at the person running amok in Berlin. Unpredictabel, like the weather, like any deterministic chaos, any self-referential system... (ah, finally reached my favourite subject! )

But, at least, we, even scientists, look at such events as the non-avoidable rest of risk.