11 Oct What the Universal Model Means for the Public
By: Gregory McIver
It is my absolute privilege and I am thrilled to share a little about the Universal Model (UM). I just want to say upfront that if you are new to this information, be prepared for the most shocking scientific information you have ever witnessed. This will actually change the way you look at EVERYTHING.
A little about myself first. I love science, technology, so many other areas. I really want to know it all. In my public school education and my own personal research, I had run into many unsolved mysteries. Also, there were many “solved” concepts that I disagreed with. Some of my evidence didn’t fit with conventionally taught conclusions. When I was in high school and college I had asked my chemistry, geology, and physics teachers and professors questions they didn’t have answers for or their attempted explanations were lacking.
Ten years ago I met Dean Sessions, the author of the UM. It was one of the best things that ever has happened in my life. At that time he had already been researching and experimenting for at least 16 years.
The first 9 chapters of the UM is called the Earth System. The simple question of “How are rocks made” will lead you to sites such as:
https://www.learner.org/interactives/rockcycle/diagram.html with its description of Igneous, Sedimentary and Metamorphic processes. It is so wrong in many ways. After you read the first section of the UM you’ll know more than most professionals about how our Earth was really made.
Don’t be surprised if you find yourself getting upset. It is a common reaction when you realize how much you’ve been taught just isn’t true. There is going to be a massive correction in the educational curriculum around the world.
The wonderful thing about the Universal Model is that it clearly displays new exciting scientific concepts never before known with so much confirming evidence that it will be difficult for any critic to formulate any substantial rebuttal. There is a lot at stake so there will be those who try. The dysfunctional ivory towers will crack and fall. This first Volume will amaze you and there are two more Volumes! I’m excited to see your reactions. Let me know what you think.
My name is Gregory McIver. Like the TV show MacGuyver, I am well rounded technically and handy. My favorite book category is “How To.” In high school and college I enjoyed the science and math classes which were some of my favorite subjects. I have substitute taught High School and Junior college classes and appreciate the interaction with others. My favorite past time is learning and I love good documentaries. The Universal Model has forever changed my life and I look forward to sharing with others the things I have learned during the last 9 years in helping with research and experiments in the UM.
Allan WadePosted at 05:19h, 18 October
You are exactly right. Experimental truth will win over the theories and philosophies of modern science.
Jason HirstPosted at 16:27h, 26 October
I was recently introduced to the UM by a colleague who knew very little about it, but it was enough to pique my interest. Initially, I thought this was just going to be an academic exercise of stretching my brain to accommodate some new bold scientific theories. I didn’t expect much from it, other than perhaps some entertainment by allowing myself to explore some radical new ideas. I was, however, willing to keep an open mind and at least hear what the author has to say, before playing devil’s advocate. I’m a firm believer that if someone is going to take their time to say something, there must at least be something worthwhile in it, even if the majority of it is nonsense.
I have just begun reading Volume 1 following its official release. I find it hard to put it down, but it also is giving me a lot of mixed emotions. By no means have I reached any solid conclusions about the UM, but I am already convinced that there is something here that is of extreme importance. The UM presents an entirely new mindset, but although it is new and contrary to much of what I have learned in my science courses over the years, there is also something extremely pragmatic about it. It presents a Universal Scientific Method that is similar in spirit to what we are already familiar with, but which is fleshed out and defined in a way that is much more universal in application, and logical in structure, than most of what is already out there in various forms.
The scientific models that this presents, and their logical conclusions that they illuminate, are the difficult part to accept. These models are a strong departure from what I have accepted as the scientific consensus on many issues, and it is causing me no small amount of mental discomfort. However, even in the event that these models ultimately are proven to be false (whether they are replaced with a new model, or the current models/theories prove superior), they have made me realize the weaknesses and the unknown variables within my current scientific understanding of the universe.
It is no understatement to say that scientists, textbooks, and educators have stated scientific conclusions with more certainty than they deserve – and in many ways, these claims seem to be no different than religious claims. They may have good reasoning behind them, and they may paint a beautiful, elaborate, and well-developed picture, but they are the product of a human mind, with very little means of discerning whether they are fact or fiction. Just because a work of art is beautiful, or exceptionally intricate in detail, does not make it an accurate portrayal of reality. It seems that we have let many famous scientists since the industrial revolution become the equivalent of artists during the enlightenment – only they paint with their intellectual theories instead of with a canvas and oil. They seek to be authoritative on the basis of their illustriousness and their acceptance by their peers, rather than relying on their logic and verification through experimentation.
The earth system models are so contrary to conventional knowledge that I’m going to have to take some time to digest them. They clearly are well=researched, and they provide plausible explanations to a lot of questions that I have had in the past. At the same time, they are so simple that I can’t help but wonder how they could have possibly been overlooked before, if they really are true. I find myself wanting to find validation from the scientific community, even though at the same time, I realize that logic and evidence are the only relevant factors to determining their truth. I guess it’s more of a comfort thing that we feel comfortable accepting an idea that others validate for us, rather than trusting our own ability to apply reason and logic.
I thought that I always had an extremely open mind, but honestly, this is putting my open-mindedness to the test. It’s extremely difficult to not reject something just because it conflicts with your current worldview, especially when it’s something that you’ve believed without questioning for a long time. I feel like I’ve just woken up in the real world after living in the Matrix, except that I’m still not entirely certain if I’m in the real world, or if I’m still in the Matrix and I’ve just lost my mind. In either event, my mind has been stretched more than I thought that it could.
I’m looking forward to learning more from this unique perspective, and to see what additional evidence is presented to substantiate these revolutionary claims.
email@example.comPosted at 13:33h, 29 April
Wow- I love what you wrote. I enjoy bucking conventional thinking, so it was very interesting (and extremely inspiring) reading your sincere thoughts about how you are struggling to keep an open mind.
I hope that I can also keep an open mind when confronted with new, and possibly differing, ideas.
I believe that you are displaying attributes of a truth-seeker!
I’m excited to learn more about the UM.