Hoops wrote:Basically they can't. However, there is always a clever (or not so clever) ad hoc way of getting around any given problem for YEC. For example, they could claim that stars are not really that far away at all or that the speed of light is not contant or that it isn't what we think it is. But modern science is an edifice of mutually supportive continually tested ideas and such ad hoc measures just create more problems than they solve--many many more.
No, they wouldn't.
I thought I gave a YEC answer. You asked about the stars. I wrote that the light in space was created on the fourth day. You'll remember that light had already been created, but this light done on the fourth day seems to be of a different kind, or had a different function. And, it is on the fourth day that a workable, usable universe became compete. So its necessary that the light from the stars must have reached the earth immediately.
One of the problems with ad hoc explanations like this is that they are seldom well thought out enough to work through the consequences of these explanations that would flow as a result of the explanation.
Proposition: the speed of light was extremely fast for a brief period of time at the very beginning of creation of the universe, maintained until light from distant galaxies had a chance to reach the earth, but then was changed to the current value sometime afterward.
First, I would argue that this idea doesn't agree with the observed homogeneity in the cosmic microwave background radiation. Places with a larger amount of stellar density would absorb and re-emit photons with much higher frequency than regions with smaller stellar density, leading to local pockets of uniformity CMBR localized to galaxies (or galatic clusters) but a general inhomogeneity in the larger universe. However, this is in direct contradiction to the observed homogeneity in the CMBR.The Big Bang Theory, specifically incorporating an early expansion of the universe, explains this observed phenomenon much better.
Second, the photon flux through regions of space would have been much higher instantaneously around the time of the creation of the universe, leading to a temporary (and dramatic) spike in temperatures throughout the universe, again especially in regions of stellar density. This spike in temperatures should be observable and should be centered around 6000 or so years ago. Indeed, we should see spikes in temperatures uniformly around this 6000 year time mark and should be able to track this change uniformly throughout the universe as the light from this time starts to reach the earth. For example, we should be seeing this right now in solar systems that are 6000 light years away from earth. In 1000 years, they should be seeing this spike in solar systems 7000 light years from earth, and so on.
Third, there is the Hubble's law. In this law, sources moving away from an observer create a shift in the wavelength of light emitted towards the red. If there was a sudden increase in the speed of light 6000 years ago with the creation of the earth, then this should be translated as a much larger red shift "shock wave" that, again, is visible propagating from throughout the universe at distances of 6000 light years in a manner similar to that described in the last paragraph.
These are just three examples of observable phenomenon that I would expect as a result of a sudden change in the speed of light 6000 years ago. Since, as far as I'm aware, none of these things have ever been observed, I would suggest that the evidence is against any change in the speed of light 6000 years ago.
The scientific problems with the sudden creation of the universe 6000 years ago would be even more numerous.
Respectfully, I submit that, based on science, YEC is a load of crap. Thanks.