someone who is talented at one may not be talented at the other.

You don't need to be talented, you only need to be competent. If you can't pass even that low bar, maybe you shouldn't publish papers which use statistics.

you can no longer say that 100 is the biggest number with 95% confidence, and this is the problem.

I don't see any problem here.

First, 95% is an arbitrary number, it's pure convention that does not correspond to any joint in the underlying reality.

Second, the t-test does NOT mean what most people think it means. See e.g. this or this.

Third, and most important, your certainty level should be entirely determined by the data. If your data does not support 95% confidence, then it does not. Trying to pretend otherwise is fraud.