I'd say you are not dealing with the concrete objections I have to the CDK model. I did not impose CDK on Setterfield, Dolphin, and all the creationists such as you who have embraced it. Rather, you have waved it at me and said, "This is the real science and you people who believe the stuff about an old universe are fools!"
If your explanation is genuinely superior, I should be able to get answers to my questions on specifics. Seeing that part of CDK involves nuclear reactions taking place at about 11 million times the current speed, my first question was why Adam wasn't cooked as soon as he was created. That question had been asked often enough already that the CDKers anticipated it and described a complicated dance in which the mass of everything was tremendously lowered to keep the energy flux the same as now by the E = mc squared relation. But that, as Setterfield admits, means the photons are being redshifted and the sun isn't glowing in anything like the color it is now.
Having repeated my question yet again, I now ask you to note that "Adam could see" is inadequate. You have to explain why he could see. CDK is committed to those high reaction rates; they're absolutely integral to the theory. So you're cooking off a lot of fuel and making a lot of photons. If you redshift them, human eyes such as eyes are now cannot see them. If you don't redshift them, you cook Adam because there are so many of those photons and they have the same energy as solar photons now.
"Adam could see." Don't just say it, explain it. After all, you're trumpeting it as the real science.
Just for clarity, since the C-side loves its little creative misreadings: ". . . because there are so vastly many more of those photons and each one has the same energy as a solar photon now."