Thank you bohm for wiriting that. I've read it a few times. So you are arguing against the proposition that intelligent beings will ever be able to gather information about the exact composition and dynamic of the universe. And you argue against the proposition using chaos theory rather than quantum theory as in the video posted above. It seems you are basically arguing against a deterministic universe.
Or maybe not, maybe you are saying that the universe in itself may be deterministic, but not in a way that we will ever be able to decipher, because our measurements wil never be precise enough. I think this is an important distinction because, if the universe in itself is not deterministic, that would seem to imply there is something more than purely a material aspect to reality. What is that extra causal element in reality and how does it square with a materialist understanding of the universe?
On the other hand, if you are saying the universe is deterministic in itself but we can never measure it well enough for it to divulge its secrets, I am still left wondering how do you know? No matter how complex the system, no matter how small the measurement required, if the universe obeys reliable laws, then in principle its trajectory should be discoverable. It is simply a matter of time and progress.
Plus my very rudimentary understanding of chaos versus classical mechanics suggests there is a problem with your suggestion that uncertainty at a micro-level due to chaos theory is multiplied as you go up. As I understand it, classical mechanics largely "works" precisely because this chaotic feature of reality is not multiplied up the scale, but tends to be cancelled out at the macro-level. The macro level at which human beings exist and function.
I still think a purely materialist conception of reality, given a progressive accumulation of information, inevitably proves future resurrection.