twohumble, I don't very often get angry, but I have on this thread. I cannot apologize for it. You have posted with, first ignorance, and then intentional ignorance. I don't have a lot of patience with intentional ignorance.

Before 1941, the MEASURED slowing speed of ilght was one of the more discussed topics in the related peer-reviewed journals. Long before the current creation movement got started! The whole discussion was brought to a "commanded" close in August of 1941 by Professor R. T. Birge in an article dealing with the changing values of the atomic constants "With special reference to the speed of light" as the title stated. Birge's first paragraph raised many questions. In part it read: "This article is being written upon request, and at this time upon request.... Any belief in a change in the physical constants of nature is contrary to the spirit of science" (his emphasis) [Reports on Progress in Physics (Vol. 8, pp.90-100, 1941)]. Although this article effectively closed the whole discussion, the data trend continued.

Some way to run science, eh?

Because, before this, here are some of the comments that had been made in writing by some rather prominent physicists who were involved in this discussion.

In 1931, after listing the four most recent determinations of c, De Bray commented in Nature "If the velocity of light is constant, how is it that, invariably, new determinations give values which are lower than the last one obtained ...? There are twenty-two coincidences in favour of a decrease of the velocity of light, while there is not a single one against it" (his emphasis).

Even Dorsey, who was totally opposed to any variation in c was forced to concede this point. He stated "As is well known to those acquainted with the several determinations of the velocity of light, the definitive values successively reported…have, in general, decreased monotonously from Cornu’s 300.4 megametres per second in 1874 to Anderson’s 299.776 in 1940…"

These were not measurement errors. The Pulkova Observatory in the old Soviet Union made a series of measurements from the late 1700's until about 1920, using the same method and instruments and during sections of time using the same observers. The results? A slowing of light speed.

Keep in mind that this was not wanted by most, but was observed anyway.

It is still not wanted by most, for it forbids evolution the time it wants and it requires a recalibrating of all atomic dates.

Nevertheless, despite the desires of those in high positions, the data continues to accumulate regarding a number of the 'constants', including light speed, and indicating changes which not only have been but are continuing.

twohumble, when I first started to present some creation material on the University of Wisconsin's Why Files (I don't know if they still exist), I was sharply reprimanded for my lack of knowledge in a number of areas. I was corrected, sometimes with scorn, sometimes with anger, sometimes with simple friendliness, by a number of evolutionists. That didn't mean their conclusions were right, but it did mean that I had swallowed some creationist arguments without ever checking their validity myself.

I had a choice.

1. I could quit the discussions altogether
2. I could make a fool of myself and continue to spout the same things
or
3. I could start studying and finding out what I was talking about.

I chose #3.

Which are you going to choose?