To the Forum:
Questions concerning the constancy of the speed of light have surfaced
again just recently - but this time from a completely unexpected
quarter. In a 'New Scientist' article entitled "Is nothing sacred?" its
author, John Barrow (Professor of Mathematical Sciences, University of
Cambridge, UK) states "Call it heresy, but all the big cosmological
problems will simply melt away, if you break one rule...the rule that
says the speed of light never varies." For those interested, details may
be found at
http://www.newscientist.com/ns/19990724/isnothings.html
If the claim be true, then a simple application of Occam's Razor
suggests that current evolutionary claims represent little more than 'a
house of cards'!
Too bad that the evidence of a decay in the speed of light is really absent. Cosmology has proposed some very early after the Big Bang variations in speed of light. Nothing really affects evolution.
Evolution stands on its own evidence.
Perhaps you should explain what the speed of light and evolution really have to do with eachother?
Radiometric dating and other dating methods show that the earth is not young.
Perhaps you can explain what you really are trying to say here?