[wagglebee]

Unfortunately, I don't understand more than the basics of this. However, it is clear that the "constants" that scientists claim "prove" the age of the universe and thus "disprove" Creation are in fact nothing more than flawed theories.

[Betaille]

IT'S BUSH'S FAULT

[El Sordo]

You get old, you slow down.

It happens.

[Cobra64]

Uh oh. There's going to be a light shortage. Light prices will zoom to 10 billion dollars per kilowatt. Batton down the hatches, arm the torpedoes, full speed ahead. Call SAC, call NORAD, call NATO and the UN (nevermind), Defcon Five, I tell ya!

[liberty or death]

There is a fanatical religion called Evolution. They will use only the flawed and biased information of a minority to force their opinion on the majority. Like college campuses around the country where the "Intellectually Tenured" who are an extreme minority dictate the politically correct trash that is now taught and spewed throughout our country.

[JRandomFreeper]

186,000 miles per second. It's not just a good idea, it's the law.

/john

[PatrickHenry]

Probably silly, but: Science list Ping! This is an elite subset of the Evolution list.
See the list's description in my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail me to be added or dropped.

[Dallas59]

Should I buy more duct tape?

[Nick Danger]

Speed of light slowing down?

I think there is evidence for this. I'm told that John Kerry gave his acceptance speech on Thursday, but I still haven't seen it.

[DallasMike]

However, it is clear that the "constants" that scientists claim "prove" the age of the universe and thus "disprove" Creation are in fact nothing more than flawed theories.

Belief in Biblical creationism does not require a young earth. As a matter of fact, there are hundreds and hundreds of different types of data indicating that the earth is about 4 billion years old and the universe is about 14 billion years old.

The changes in the speed of light talked about in these theories are either (1) so infinitesimal; or (2) occurred in such a short period of time (like perhaps minutes) that they're of no use for those clamoring for anything to prove that the universe is less than 10,000 years old.

The evidence for a young creation in the Bible is about the same as that for the earth being the center of the universe -- none. Clinging to young earth creationism (a man-made doctrine) only makes Christians look stupid. All truth is God's truth and we shouldn't be afraid of science.

[aculeus]

It's most noticable while waiting for a red light to turn green.

[EagleUSA]

Many have been trying to disprove Einstein's work, but so far, no cigar (oops, sorry Clinton)!!! But there is an interesting experiment in space (or about to be) in another attempt at confirming or denying the accuracy of the light constant. Should be interesting....

And yes, the velocity of liberal spin is much lower than that of truth, so we are still waiting for the arrival of Kerry's national policy and plans for America (other than a massive dose of Marxism...)... (chuckle)

[RadioAstronomer]

Unfortunately, I don't understand more than the basics of this. However, it is clear that the "constants" that scientists claim "prove" the age of the universe and thus "disprove" Creation are in fact nothing more than flawed theories.

Codswallop.

[SunkenCiv]

does this explain Satchel Paige?

[Servant of the 9]

A variation in the speed of light makes no difference in the fallacy of creationism.

If the speed of light is changing, then so ie the speed of chemical reactions and atomic decay.

Time itself is a constant because we define the universe that way. If time is defined as variable, it makes the calculations more complex, but does not change the results.

So9

[Camel Joe]

We're DOOMED, DOOMED I say...

[Jordi]

If it were true, there would have been much more clear proves of the slowing speed of light.

Actually they can measure it with a margin of less than 0.0001% (Digital electronics,thank u).

Make several measurements at distance of months,and build a time serie. It's relatively easy and cheap.

If you find a slowing trend, ok. Else, thank u but I stick with Einstein.

[Larry Lucido]

Thank goodness. At my age, I was having trouble keeping up with it.

[Lazamataz]

Of course light is slowing down. It's constantly rubbing against the ether. That means there's friction, which comes off in the form of radio waves.

Y'see.

[Physicist]

Even the creationists reject the idea:

By the late 1980's, the complete lack of scientific support for Setterfield's assertions caused even the ICR to publicly reject his theory, concluding that it was "not warranted by the data upon which the hypothesis rests." (Gerald Aardsma, ICR Impact, "Has the Speed of Light Decayed?", May 1988). "Even a cursory glance at the data," the ICR concluded, "reveals that the above analysis is inappropriate for the given data set, and, hence, the conclusions drawn from it are not valid . . . . This result says pretty clearly that there is no discernible decay trend in the data set." (Gerald Aardsma, ICR Impact, "Has the Speed of Light Decayed?", May 1988)

(Reference: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/cdecay.htm)

[SC Swamp Fox]

Bump, for later.