09 May Official Universal Model Statement on Modern Scientists
May 9, 2017
By: The UM Team
Although the Universal Model makes the claim that modern science is in a “Dark Age,” even a crisis, we recognize the need to clarify the difference between modern science and the modern scientists.
We, the UM Team, see ourselves as “standing on the shoulders of giants” and we emphasize the difference between modern science as an accumulation of ideas and observations and modern scientists as a diverse community of human beings. Modern science is essentially a massive collection of hypotheses, experiments, observations and interpretations, theoretical constructs, and natural laws. Over time, this body of “knowledge,” developed largely by previous generations of scientists, has taken on increasing authority by a process of generational consensus.
It is toward this framework of hypotheses, theories, and assumptions–especially those found in the theoretical sciences, where little to no experimental evidence has been provided–that we direct the majority of our criticism.
While highlighting this crisis in modern science, the UM Team also wishes to convey a profound sense of appreciation for the work of countless diligent scientists who have helped make our research possible. We believe that most scientists display remarkable integrity and are motivated by a sincere desire to elevate society, improve the human condition, protect our beautiful Earth, and save and prolong lives. Some of them have given their lives or freedom for the cause of science and it is difficult to convey in words the gratitude we have for the many science heroes and heroines of both past and present. We acknowledge the many disciplined scientists who engage in rigorous scientific research and use actual, reproducible observations to draw their conclusions. We honor these scientists for their efforts and have actually used much of their work in support of the Universal Model.
We know that the vast majority of sincere, hardworking scientists are open to new discoveries and are more than willing to realign their own views when sufficient evidence can be shown (along with a well-documented and rigorous scientific methodology). Sadly, there have been a few who have used the cloak of science to advance personal or political agendas, which on its face is a gross betrayal of one of the pillars of science, ethical integrity. Upcoming volumes of the Universal Model will include a thorough discussion of this issue.
Finally, we acknowledge that many of the scientists who have promoted modern science’s entrenched dogmas and theories were, and are, men and women of sound character who simply have not been exposed to all the information now available. We also recognize that there will be many within the science community, with the best of intentions, who will vigorously challenge our research. This is expected, of course, and we welcome any who wish to objectively review the UM’s claims and attendant body of evidence. While the UM is a new and iconoclastic approach to conventional science, by no means does it make any claim of infallibility. Indeed this work is to be viewed as a work-in-progress and we look forward to enlisting the support of members of the scientific community as we work together to develop theory, make predictions, test the predictions, observe and evaluate the results, and compare them to the new natural laws discovered by the Universal Model.
The Universal Model Team
Mark EllisPosted at 15:42h, 17 May
Many of us in the scientific community, especially those of us in the work-a-day world find that many of the scientific tools we were handed by our teachers and mentors were dull or broken. UM has given us some usable tools and concepts geared towards discovering new scientific laws. Am I the only one tired of the politically correct, money filled science catastrophes that seem to smear the honorable intentions of scientists of years gone by? UM is an earnest attempt at finding out the truth of things that we have blinded ourselves to, all because we just don’t accept the truth of what is in front of us. This is exciting and promises a vigorous debate and a real “do-over” for some of the sloppy science I have seen in the last 4+ decades of my scientific career.