Why should I? Materialism is hands down the most accurate description of World we have today. It only cannot explain where World comes from or how (which, I assume, is exactly what irks you about it). On the other hand, all idealistic trains of thought are either based on wrong initial assumptions or became so plagued by various idiocies throughout millennia (disembodied entities, individual souls, reincarnation, law of attraction, twin flames, etc. -- you get the point) as to be virtually useless (harmful even).

When it comes to that Grand Canyon you talk about, I pretty much agree with Vedic thought that posits that "Maya is inscrutable." In other words, there is no chance for humans to know how exactly perception arises and "registers" in consciousness (while both being essentially identical). Though, as far as I'm concerned, self-realization makes that particular problem pretty moot. Hence, the importance of absolute self-knowledge.

Just as a side note, that article that disappointed you was just meant to demonstrate that thoughts are measurable (i.e. physical) and since I, indeed, say that qualities are, in effect, demonstrable illusions, there's nothing further to explain. That piece about information-energy-mass equivalence, then, (while, indeed, meandering and without a clear resolution), just hints at how the Relative relates to Absolute and where the "boundaries" might be. Alas, as I said above, "Maya is inscrutable" in the end.

I can understand why my position might be confusing to you, but it is what it is ;)