# Pseudoscience, and the age of the universe

Speed of Light may not be constant, physicists Say. Einstein’s theory of special relativity sets of the speed of light, 186,000 miles per second (300 million meters per second). But some scientists are exploring the possibility that this cosmic speed limit changes. The speed of light is constant, or so textbooks say.

Now, I read this and thought to myself about something regarding how old the universe is, and how far away the distant stars are. Everything we know about the cosmos in regards to time and distance is completely dependent upon the speed of light.

For example: we have been taught that the universe is millions of billions of years old due to the fact that the constant speed of light takes time to reach us from those distant stars (hypothetically, if the speed of light is one mile per hour and the light takes three hours to reach you, you can then infer that the star is three miles away).

Here is the thing; guys like Neil deGrasse Tyson love words like, infer, conclude, and deduce… because they are fancier ways of saying “assume“.

So, how do we know how far away, or how old, the stars are in the universe? Let’s ask Neil. According to Neil, we know for a fact based on a measurement technique that is assumed to be constant (speed of light).

Now, Albert Einstein said in his Relativity paper that “light requires the same time to traverse the path A-M as for the path B-M is in reality neither a supposition nor a hypothesis about the physical nature of light, but a stipulation which I can make of my own freewill in order to arrive at a definition of simultaneity“. In short, assumptions are made. A fact based on assumption is what we call blind faith. We don’t know the speed from point A to point B, or the speed from point B to point C. We only know the total speed from point A to C and “assume” the round trip is the same.

So, what exactly am I getting at then? Rather than typing up a long drawn out explanation, I found a video that does a great job at describing the assumption that Albert Einstein was referring to in his Relativity paper. The fact that this physicist is a young creation Christian is coincidental and beside the point. The point is, we don’t know… and assumptions have to be made in order to arrive to a conclusion about the age of stars and the universe.

So, what am I getting at here… what is the point?

Here is the thing; determining the distance of a star requires the speed of light to be the same in both directions at all times throughout the history or the cosmos. Not only does light appear to be slowing down according to the article linked above, but we do not know that the speed of light is the same through release and reflection.

Example: If I throw a ball at one hundred miles an hour and it slows down slightly before hitting a wall and bouncing back to me, wouldn’t it be a fact that the ball is no longer going the same speed when it gets back to me, and that if it slowed down on the way there that it is probably slowing down on the way back as well?  To only count the total speed there and back and dividing them in half to determine the actual speed of the object is based on assumption.

The truth is, the age and distance of stars is completely based on inference. And since this assumption of a star’s age is presented as truth, we use the age of the star to age the universe. This is called pseudoscience, people. A collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.

Now, am I arguing that the world is only 6,000 years old and that all the stars are super close? No, not at all. What I am arguing is that you can’t make an assumption while parading it as fact to the entire planet. The entire doctrine of cosmology with the Big Bang Theory and the age of the commons is built on an evolutionary assumption, not fact. I don’t know what your bible says, but mine says that the earth was made first, before the sun. And this is contrary to what the scientific community it parading as truth.

Am I going to believe in the assumptions of men, or am I going to stand firm on the word of God? We are in a time when man is being tested. We are in a time where what you put your faith in matters more than ever. Dusk is fading, and night draws near.

Until you can actually measure the one way speed of light, the entire cosmological doctrine of time and distance is standing on faith in something they “believe” to be true. And if this is the case, why is it being taught as fact in the public school system?

Who are we kidding though. Let’s leave the real thinking for the men and women in the lab coats. I’m just ignorant and don’t know any better.

The age of the universe truly is 13.8 billion years old. And all the stars out there are billions of light years away. The constant speed of light told us so…

What a joke.

If anyone tells you that we know for a fact that the universe is such and such old and that a star is such and such distance away, they are either ignorantly being led or they are lying. Truth is we have no clue, because no one knows the one way speed of light which is how science is claiming to make the measurement!