I don't understand why you bother using analogies. The points are plenty easy to understand, and the analogy as you make it is a poor fit.

How can we test whether your model is wrong? It seems so vague and general as to be untestable (and, because of this, also unhelpful for understanding).

Can you give a concrete example of something scientists are missing? So far everything you've come up with ranges from wrong to not-science.