[Tenacious 1]

but they are not moving faster than light- if time is variable and millions of years pass within seconds of the big bang, then WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME lightspeed is still the speed limit

The theory comes together in this. Speed is a function of time. And time can be variable depending on speed. It could therefore be postulated that the speed of light over the course of time has changed. By today's "speed of light" standards, scientists must assume that the big bang moved mass (from nothingingness) significantly faster than the speed of light. This would throw off the age of the universe by a good measure.

Look at it another way. If the expansion (speed) of the universe (matter in it) is slowing down, can we assume time then is also slowing? By human's definition of time, we can see objects that are producing light that are 13 billion years old. But if light once moved faster than it does by our standards today, and time has changed, who is to say how old, or how big our universe actually is (Since time and space are linked as a constant in human physics).

(I think I pulled a neuron.)

[metmom]

Thank you.

Good points.

Science requires what it considers constants to be, well, constant. And there’s simply no way of knowing if they are or not.

Science, in its rejection of theology, makes a number of philosophical assumptions based on something. Necessity, most likely since they HAVE to make those assumptions for their theories to hold.

[swampfox101]

“(I think I pulled a neuron.)”

Always happens when the “finite” try to put the “infinite” in a box...! lol

[Buggman]

It could therefore be postulated that the speed of light over the course of time has changed.

Except for the results of a very basic physical formula that we all know: E=MC^2. If the speed of light (C) were higher in the past, the energy (E) or mass (M) of distant stars would be likewise effected, and we could clearly see that they were operating under different physics. They aren't.

For that matter, if C were high enough 6000 years ago to bring us the light of stars billions--or even millions--of light-years away, Adam would have been instantly incinerated by the vastly increased light of the Sun.

Even Danny Faulkner, being a Young-Universe Creationist but also an astronomer, admits that speed of light decay is a non-starter for defending the position.

Food for thought. Shalom.