"Sometimes I feel like we are just blind people stumbling in an universe filled with stuff we cannot comprehend."
This seems to allude to the previous statements about how we measure things. As such, it implies that these things we can comprehend in part you are saying we are blind to, stumbling, and can't comprehend it even if we try because of level of "uncertainty", "inference", etc. Please correct me with a more specific statement on your part, if this is not the case.
Otherwise, I will continue. You seem to mistake being in a vast universe where we can't comprehend everything there is, vs. being able to comprehend some of it. Of course there are things we can't comprehend. We seek to develop ways to uncover more understanding about reality. Corrections are required as we develop more knowledge.
There is not 100% certainty in anything if you want to get into a reductionist perspective, so pointing out uncertainty as a "problem" isn't really saying much.
Also, in addition to implying uncertainty is some big issue, you also imply inference is another big problem, when int isn't either. Further implying this fault of inference and learning about reality, by saying it's a house of cards that we only "hope" won't collapse... LOL. Inferences are how we think, that's reality. How would you expect us to think and form conclusions without inference? As such you're criticism lacks validity.
Thanks for the comment, it seems today is the "philosophy" day on Steemit. I got in another very nice discussion on @dantheman post about consensus.
First of all, it's not criticism, it's opinion. It's my way of seeing things. As for inference on top of other inferences, things are way subtler. What I was referring to was our ability to create reality from suppositions.
For a long time, we thought the Earth is flat.
And then we realized it's round.
And then we thought Sun is rotating around Earth.
And then we realized Earth is rotating around the Sun.
There is no intrinsic way to know when our inferences will be proven wrong again. We simply don't know if our model of the universe right now, this one based on atoms, is actually true. It passes some tests and it fills in some gaps, but that doesn't make it automatically true. For centuries, people were absolutely convinced the Sun rotates around the Earth, because it passed some tests and it filled in some gaps.
Our current way of understanding the Universe, based on science, seems very fragile to me, that's all.