We don't have to understand the universe completely to be very confident that it contains no contradictions.

Where is the proof of concept for this?

I have several resources which point to extreme inconsistency with the current and past behaviors of particle and astro physics. Beyond natural sciences, there are inconsistencies in the way that political systems are organized and interacted with even on a local level - yet most find them acceptable enough to continue to work with.

You argue that inconsistency alone is enough to reject a theory. The point I make is that understanding that a process may work differently under different circumstances is not necessarily inconsistent and does not "guarantee" it being wrong. That is the point behind chaotic modeling.

There can still be valuable achievements that come from better understanding how the seemingly inconsistent theories work and I argue would not be wholly acceptable as a sole reason for rejection as you seem to advocate.

I still am not convinced that all systems must be consistent to exist - however that is a much different discussion.