The speed of light, stars, and YEC?

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

That's the bit that confused me in the article. Is the author suggesting that the speed of light is different in relation to Earth, or in relation to the observer? Both seem ludicrous, and I can come up with all sorts of problems for both, but it was never quite clear to me from the article which of these nutty proposals it was putting forward.

It's been awhile since I've fully read the article, but that's about the short of it, yes, assuming I recall what it says accurately.
I don't remember precisely if it's referring to an 'observer' (as in a person) or the earth. Neither of which would make sense given that the earth is moving around the sun, the sun around the galactic core, and the galaxy itself and the local supercluster are all moving in independant directions.

So if the laws of physics were different depending on where you were, we would have noticed by now because the Earth is always moving and moving quickly. As such the pseudo-science in the article cannot be accurate given that simple fact as well as all of the practical data from our own efforts at space exploration of our solar system and beyond.

For example, it would make all of our space probes fail to do their job if we used Einstein's relativity and the universe was actually using an Asymmetric light convention where light would travel away from the earth at half light speed but return instantaneously because communications would arrive to our probes and satillites at half speed when we calculate their arrival at light speed - critically important when calibrataing very precise scientific instraments and the probe's thruster movements and orbital adjustments.

All the paper is is an attempt to allow for a young universe that's still the size that it is. It's a pointless venture anyway because to get to this point (among other young-earth conventions) you're already ignoring or severely rewriting major scientific understandings of humanity, the earth, and the universe to get to this point.

It's insane and utterly stupid.

EDIT:
Oh, there's also this.
Statler and others, if you check out that link, you'll notice that we filthy humans have invented a camera that can capture light in transit.
Perhaps it's just me, but given that we can speed-time light in real time frame-by-frame, we can easily tell now if light moves at a speed other than 300,000 km a second. That is, using a method you creationists can't BS around given that it's been well established in other reliable methods. I have yet to see any such major headlines by anyone anywhere stating that light moves at a speed other than 300000 km/second.