Science, Creation & EvolutionLength of a Genesis dayI do not understand your problems tuppence. I present you with facts and instead for showing proof that my facts are wrong you say: Lets try it again. Fact: The speed of light has always been constant. Argument a: For this argument I would like to quote tuppence from here But that is not really what this fact is about, so therefore: the next argument: Argument b: The data that indicates that the measured value of c has been higher in the past is questionable in more than one way. The first thing that should be questioned is the precision. The further we go in the past, the more the values differ from the expected value of c and the lower the precision of the value is. The second thing to question is the definition of the second. Take a look at Wiki and you see that before 1956 the second was defined as 1/86.400 of a mean solar day. By taking a look at Setterfields report we see that the measured decreasing of c almost comes to a complete halt at 1957. What a coincidence.... Especially if we see the data from the IERS that shows that the earths rotation around its axis is not constant but seems to decrease in speed. Lets see if we can get a usefull response this time. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame