A different view:
http://www.khouse.org/articles/1999/225/
I'm sure you'll love it, Astro.
This is just part of the article:
The Controversy Continues: Speed of Light Slowing Down? by Chuck Missler The field of physics worships at the altar of c, the velocity of light. It is widely regarded as the inviolate constant which affects all things: from our knowledge of astronomy to the very behavior of subatomic particles. Even the basic relationship between mass and energy is known by every schoolboy as E = mc2.
For many years, and in many of our previously published materials, we have made allusions to the very controversial view, held by some, that the speed of light (usually designated mathematically by "c") has been slowing down.1 We have, naturally, received a number of adverse reactions from those who have difficulties dealing with this possibility.
Evidence suggesting that the velocity of light, c, has been slowing down throughout history was first reported by Barry Setterfield and Trevor Norman for some years.2 Now two physicists-Dr. Joao Magueijo, a Royal Society research fellow at Imperial College, London, and Dr. Andreas Albrecht, of the University of California at Davis-are proposing that, immediately after the universe was born, the speed of light may have been far faster than its present-day value of 186,000 miles per second.3 They now believe that it has been slowing down ever since. The effects predicted by their theory are to be published in the prestigious scientific journal, Physical Review. "If it's true, it would be a very big leap forward that will affect our perception of the universe and much of theoretical physics," said Dr. Magueijo.
One mystery that it seems to be able to explain is why the universe is so uniform-why opposite extremes of the cosmos that are too far apart to have ever been in contact with each other appear to obey the same rules of physics and are even at about the same temperature. It would only be possible for light to cross from one side to the other if it traveled much faster than today moments after the universe was created, between 10 billion and 15 billion years ago. Their hypothesis suggests it was so fast that it could have been travelling at 186,000 miles a second multiplied by a figure with 70 zeroes after it!
Calculations based on the theory also give the most elegant explanation for the speed at which the universe appears to be expanding, which is thought to be just fast enough to avoid an eventual collapse to a big crunch. Instead, the universe would simply grow forever-though at a decreasing rate-and its ultimate fate, it is suggested, would be a slow, lingering death as all the stars burn out and every particle of matter within it separates.
"It is remarkable when you can find one simple idea that has so many appealing consequences," said John Barrow, professor of astronomy and director of the Astronomy Centre at the University of Sussex, who has collaborated with Magueijo and Albrecht.
It is disturbing that with this view continuing to gain credibility in some quarters, acknowledgment of the contributions of Setterfield, Norman, and others is conspicuous by its absence.