[RegulatorCountry]

An interesting speculation, suitable for sophomoric dorm-room bull-sessions and little else, absent some confirmed evidence seriously supporting it.

Given your apparent desire to belittle such a notion, it seems clear that you regard it as anything but interesting and are prone to ruling such a thing out before the fact.

It's interesting to me, that those who deem themselves defenders of science are also so prone to a priori assumption in defense of their pet theories.

[BroJoeK]

Regulator Country from post #39: "...maybe the theory is flawed and constantly expanding the time horizon is an error."

RegulatorCountry: "...those who deem themselves defenders of science are also so prone to a priori assumption in defense of their pet theories."

So... cite some confirmed evidence seriously falsifying today's theories on "deep time", or go home, Pal.