From what I have read, the constancy of the period of pulsars disproves Setterfield, and I would think the steady expansion of light rings around supernovae, which have been used to confirm astronomical distance measurements, would disprove Jason Lisle's Thought (I could not call it a theory)
Hi Taq. Thanks for that link. Setterfield has more problems than I thought. It is a pity people have to spend so much time and effort refuting hare-brained ideas!