★★ [4.3 SECOND conversion] ★★: CONVERT religious to atheist, in roughly 4.3 seconds.

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

I don't think you got my point.

How do humans observe the universe?  Great question, science can try to help us figure it out.  
Asking a physicist to discuss the impact of the uncertainty principle on omniscience, on the other hand, will be received with an awkward look.
That's because omniscience has nothing to do with science.
It is a philosophical device primarily used in metaphysics.  
Saying science tells us X about omniscience is a nonsensical statement.
Science has as much to say about omniscience as it does about god, or any other metaphysical concept.  Absolutely nothing.

You're argument is that science asserts that we can only have probabilistic knowledge of something.  That's great, stick to that!  
You seem to think the uncertainty principle is proof that we can't have absolute knowledge.  Why?
The uncertainty principle says nothing about macro observations.  It also says nothing about absolute knowledge on the whole.  It says that a set of two specific measurements can't be made perfectly.

I am inclined to agree with the conclusion that absolute knowledge isn't possible.  But your god awful at proving it.

I tend to use the phrase 'as far as science goes'.

I have not once stated that absolute knowledge isn't possible, but instead, that as far as science goes, we don't measure any event with absolute certainty.