Interpretation of Texts (General)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 18, 2010, 20:51 (5178 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Radiometric dating, in its may forms, measures the decay of a radioactive element into its new form(daughter). The rate at which this process occurs is variable in tandem with the speed of light. Look up Barry Setterfield who proposed the idea. Basically, radiometric decay is maintained at a constant rate that is intimately tied with the speed of light. If the speed of light changes, so does the rate of decay. His theory was that light traveled faster after the big bang and has been gradually slowing. -The proposed changes in light speed have been very small. Therefore radiometric ages would only have very minor changes.
> 
> To quote Richard Feynman "...there is also an amplitude for light to go faster (or slower) than the conventional speed of light. You found out in the last lecture that light doesn't go only in straight lines; now, you find out that it doesn't go only at the speed of light! It may surprise you that there is an amplitude for a photon to go at speeds faster or slower than the conventional speed, c. -I'm glad you are following Feynman. A great genius and a real character.-> 
> The next article I found was from something fantastic. A model of the universe that doesn't require a big bang, dark matter, black holes, or any of that other madness. All that it requires is that the speed of light is not constant, and to look into new relationships between mass, space, and time.
> 
> As I said in an earlier post. My changing position is not because I am a young earth creationist, but because lots and lots of little tiny pieces are falling into position and painting a whole new picture that may make many scientific assumptions have to be reformulated.-I think you are overreacting to the 'stuff' you are finding. The blog notes a great problem. Where is the CRB? That is real and its almost exact form or irregularities were predicted by the Inflation Theory of Guth. Read his book , 'The inflationary Universe", and on page 243 he states, "the agreement was gorgeous!". As I said before, there are all sorts of wild and daring theories out there, most of which go nowhere. All the stuff has to fit! A series of findings should interlock. But the public doesn't trust scientific concensus:-http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/2/2010/09/17/title_91-In regard to global warming, that's great. The climate fiasco is primarily 'one world' government politics, and 3rd World grubbing for money thru the UN.