The speed of light, stars, and YEC?

[Zen Badger]

'If the math works" you keep saying that but you've never shown how it works.

You claimed awhile ago that you read the peer reviewed article on ASC, so I assumed you also checked the calculations in the article itself. Either way, position dependent relativity rather than velocity dependent relativity still works fine.

I never made any such claim, if fact I have been unable to even find his so-called "peer reviewed" article, so if you have it that would be nice.
All I ever saw was this http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&...dgD78xtr2g

To keep it simple for you, in 1676 Ole Roemer, by observing the transit of Io behind Jupiter calculated when it should reappear, then demonstrated that the times differed depending on where Earth was in its orbit. This showed that light was taking longer to get to Earth the further away from Jupiter it was. Therefore proving that contrary to previous belief c was not infinite.

This does nothing to disprove ASC; I even believe this was addressed in the article you claim to have read. He was measuring the round trip speed of light, which is exactly the same whether you are using ASC or ISC (also known as ESC).

That is where you are wrong, Roemer was NOT measuring the round trip of the light from Earth to Io and back again, he was only measuring the journey from Io to Earth because the original source was the Sun.
Lisle's "theory"(I LOL at the oxymoron) relies on the fact that we can't theoretically calculate light speed from A to B, we can only measure from A to B and back to A and then taking an average from the two trips.

But when the light travels from X (the Sun) to B (Io) and then to A (Earth) then the only measurement you can take is from B to A.
And if Lisle's theory was correct then the trip would be the same time interval regardless of the distance between Earth and Io i.e, zero.

So the fact that there IS a difference means that light does take a finite amount of time to traverse the distance. Therefore disproving his "theory"

And no-one with even the faintest understanding of basic physics could ever take either seriously.

So the fact that Einstein was originally going to use ASC rather than ISC means he didn’t have the faintest understanding of basic physics? You are priceless.

And where does he actually say this?

---

And if you could give a list of reputable institutions etc that have reviewed Lisle's paper that would also be good.