Re: concordism/time

From: glenn morton (mortongr@flash.net)
Date: Wed Jan 12 2000 - 00:34:06 EST

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: concordism/time"

    At 12:58 AM 1/12/00 PST, Adam Crowl wrote:
    >Hi ASA
    >
    >Dick, I think you might've over-reacted. I don't think Jim's espousing
    >Setterfield lunacy. Some research does indicate a higher velocity for c in
    >the far, far past during the very hot and tiny phase of the Big Bang. By the
    >time nucleii had formed it was down to its current value.

    Hi Adam

    THis is not at all what Jim is referring to. You obviously don't know who
    Lambert Dolphin is nor have you looked at his web page or you wouldn't say
    this. Lambert is a big supporter of Setterfield's lunacy and has articles
    by Setterfield on his web page.

    articles include but are not limited to:

    A Brief History of c

    Implications of Changing Constants, by Lambert Dolphin. New information
    added 3/8/99.

    A Layman's Guide to the CDK Debate, by Malcolm Bowden

    Reports of the Death of Speed of Light Decay are Premature, by Malcolm
    Bowden (April 1998, CEN TJ article)

    Atomic Behavior, Light and the Redshift, by Barry Setterfield - | PDF
    version

    Faster Than the Speed of Light (space travel and the speed of gravity)

    What is Light?

    While Setterfield has grabbed ahold of the idea that light traveled faster
    in the wee parts of the Big Bang, they only use that as philosphical
    support for the concept that c has changed.
    glenn

    Foundation, Fall and Flood
    Adam, Apes and Anthropology
    http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm

    Lots of information on creation/evolution



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 12 2000 - 06:28:34 EST