Yes. And tests of physics do well to explain the universe as we know it today. They are not necessarily reliable in determining the course of unobserved, unrecorded history, no matter how much you feel to the contrary. You say the physics are "the same." But you do not know if they were the same 10,000 years ago. You only assume as much.
You think ignorance is an ad hominum?
No. I think accusations of willful ignorance are ad hominem, such as when you asserted that I "don't even try to know to attempt understanding." The "fundamentals" you hold so dear, and declare me to be so ignorant of, involve assumptions that are not scientifically accessible. Deal with it.
The laws of physics are constant. All the evidence points to that. The laws of chemistry and physics now, are the same now as they were before and will be in the future.
I reckon you would deny Einstein a say had you lived a century before he was born. You would also say the Periodic Table of Elements is incapable of expansion. Frankly, in asserting the above, you reveal your own ignorance as to the purpose and scope of science.
But it sounds good. The laws of physics operate as they were designed, albeit to a lesser degree than originally intended. That is to say they are fading, but nevertheless demonstrate order. They are certainly within the realm of scientific endeavor. Evolutionism makes extrapolations that, while on the surface may be reasonable, are simply outside the realm of science. Deal with it.
I assume nothing. Regarding the laws of physics, I told you, that I can look back ~5B yrs ago and beyond. Why did you ignore that and make the above claim? Do you realize you're making claims about what you know nothing about?