If you'd read the article instead of making a knee-jerk anti-creationist reaction, you'd see that they didn't say that the decay rate isn't constant now.
Something changing once at one time in the past due to extenuating circumstances, is not the same as something being variable in nature all the time.
But don't let any kind of reasoning get in the way of your blind hatred of Christians and creationists.
So it used to be variable, but now it has decided to be constant? Why shouldn’t it start changing tomorrow (since apparently it can switch back and forth). And what “extenuating circumstance” produced this hypothesised (and
And, my dear, I don’t hate creationists or Christians. I just think the attempts of some of them to use the bible as a science text are silly.