Mageth

Maybe that's why I said "explain" rather than "describe."

And that's why I also said that the motion of the planets was explained as well. You said it was "impossible" to explain the motion of the planets before gravity; it's trivially obvious that it was not. The fact that the explanations weren't correct does not matter (science doesn't even claim that the current theories accounting for the motions of the planets are 100% correct).

His understanding of cosmology in general doesn't counteract his misinterpretation of the article.

But it does give him a base from which to make assessments.

I don't see how you can apply that to this hypothesis, since we're not talking about a particular beam of light being observed in real time from different observation points in space,

It applies directly to your conjecture:

If light appears to be slowing down, perhaps that is an illusion caused by everything else speeding up.

Special relativity says that's not possible, as the speed of light is the same for all observers, no matter what their relative speeds. This says nothing about a particular beam of light being observed in "real time" (according to relativity, there is no "real time", BTW) from different observation points (which is impossible, BTW; a particular beam of light could only be observed by one observer at a time). It says that any observers measuring the speed of any light, no matter their relative speed, would measure the same speed for light. Speed the observers up as much as you want; the speed of light would still measure the same.

...but about the speed of light being measured from different points in time.

Under your "everything else speeding up" scenario, no matter what point in time you measure the speed of light, the measurement would be the same. Measure it one century, you get one light speed. Measure it 100 years later, going faster, the same. Measure it 1000 years later, going faster still, the same light speed. The only way to get a different measurement would be if the speed of light itself changed.

fishbulb

The design-by-committee hypothesis would certainly seem to fit with the universe we see far better than the idea of the lone designer with a grand vision.

caravelair

i would definately agree. which is why i don't understand yguy's assertion that i am misinterpreting the article.

yguy

Since, for my part, I don't understand why you don't understand, I guess we're even.

Tabula_rasa

And especially for S. carlsbegensis!

Tabula_rasa

RBH

Autonemesis wroteKeep up with the literature, people! Multiple Designers Theory lives!

RBH