I have a question for young earth creationists - When talking about the Anisotropic Synchrony
Convention (which I will attempt explain in a minute), why does Dr Jason Lisle get to
make his own assumption and a huge assumption at that, when he tries to figure out and come
to terms with why there are galaxies billions of light years away, and there are also these
vast distances in the universe that light has had to traverse?
No matter what he finds, no matter what the evidence shows him Dr Lisle is committed to
sticking to a 6,000 year old universe.
Why is that?
Jason Lisle works for Answers In Genesis and one of the leaders of the organization, Ken
Ham, insists that what he calls "secular" scientists can never rightly determine the
age of the universe because all of their dating methods and measurements are based on "failed
human reasoning" and "assumptions" mixed in with that human reasoning.
And the problem I have, and every person who has ever visited Kan Ham's website should
have with Dr Lisle, is that he also makes one huge assumption, one that is staring everyone
right in the face, in interpreting the speed of light with regard to the Anisotropic Synchrony
Convention.
The bottom line is that Dr Lisle and Answers in Genesis, they get to make assumptions and
vast ones at that, but they can't allow others in the so-called, "secular" science camp to
make any assumptions at all.
This does two things that are bad for astronomy and science as a whole.
First, by displaying such arrogance and hypocrisy, Ken Ham and Dr Lisle in effect brainwash their
followers into thinking that there is something fatally flawed with every dating method in
use today and with every way to measure billions of light year distances in the universe.
That is dangerous thinking, not even remotely true and fundamentally dishonest at the most
basic level.
You can't tell people that they should not listen to "those other scientists" on the
one hand because they are pagan, they make assumptions and their worldview is incorrect,
therefore their science is not valid, while on the other hand, making incredibly wild
assumptions as to the speed of light in a theory that may not ever be able to ever be
tested and then telling your adherents, "that's okay, our worldview is the correct one, we
can assume all we want."
That is essentially what Dr Jason Lisle is doing when he has to figure out the mental
gymnastics to get around the deal breaking reality that billion light year distant galaxies
actually had to exist billions of years ago for us to see them today.
Dr Lisle uses the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention that calls into question the round-trip speed
of light vs the one way speed of light.
Albert Einstein postulated that light could vary its speed in one direction and change
it again on a return trip to a viewer as long as long at the round trip speed was equal
to C (which is the speed of light).
The Anisotropic Synchrony Convention is pretty complicated to explain and we don't have the
time here to give it its due, but it does allow for for varying speeds of light, in
theory.
And that "in theory" is big because there is no proof whatsoever that light can change
its velocity at all.
It is purely a suppositional theory that may not ever be able to be tested.
There is however, one team of Canadian scientists that claim to have tested the one way speed
of light and found no change in the speed.
But back to Jason Lisle, the problem Dr Lisle creates in his wild assumption as to his use
of the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention is that he picks the one and only speed of light
that would make his assumptions work for a very young earth and universe of nearly 6,000
years.
Either you can't make assumptions in science or any aspect of life, Dr Lisle, or you can.
Dr Lisle's boss, Ken Ham, says in so much of the material he puts out, that secular
science and all dating methods are based on assumptions and therefore, not valid.
But wait a minute, is there not a difference in a reasonable assumption and a wild assumption?
Is there not a difference between the reasonable assumption of looking at a chair and thinking
it is built well enough to hold you, and then the wild assumption of looking at part of
a theory like Dr Lisle has done, that may not even be able to be tested and could have
an infinite number of choices and then picking that one and only choice that would make your
mental gymnastics work?
Why is Dr Lisle allowed to do that and yet on the other hand, rail against the dating
methods that are an absolute deal breaker for young earth creationism?
I'll let you young earth creationists contemplate that for awhile.
You can read some of the source material I link to in the description below this video.