Good gravy,
1. The material is posted on Setterfield's site, but the references are from mainstream secular physics journals! Are you trying to say that if Setterfield references it then it must be wrong?
2. The Aardsma article on the data use in the 1987 report was fallacious. You will notice no measurements are given on the chart. That is because they are so big that the changes shown in the historical data all get lumped together. It is the same idea as deciding to measure the petal lengh of flowers in kilometers. The actual data, shown in appropriate scale, describes a definite and consistent downward trend. This was noted by physicists in the early part of the twentieth century. As for the Setterfield use of the data, it has been examined and reported on quite accurately by Lambert Dolphin, a senior research physicist at Stanford Research Institute International at the time and Alan Montgomery, a senior statistical analyst for the Canadian goverment. Their reports may be found here: http://www.setterfield.org/data.htm
3. It is obvious you have neither looked at the post above where I described historical ways of measuring the speed of light nor have you looked at the Setterfield material for yourself.
Please inform yourself of what you are talking about before you start talking about it, OK?