That's technically true when you say "stats alone" and that's true for any mathematics. Mathematics is often self consistent, and within its axioms you can prove things as true or false about numbers. But once you start qualifying those numbers and interpreting what they mean, then you introduce the possibility of improper framing and misinterpretation. Super simple example, but 1+1=2 is unquestionably true (we invented all those symbols such that the statement would be true).
When you start qualifying, you can come to false ststements, like 1 apple + 1 rock = 2 vegetables is not true despite 1+1=2 being true. Thus is an obvious example - it gets a lot more difficult to parse with abstract definitions (as in sociology and psychology) and probabilistic statements.
Here's a read you may find interesting:
"The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences"
https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/Math...ng/Wigner.html