I hate to be another "pile on" but there is something that I really have to point out.
How is this argument of yours any different than simple's, "the world was totally different in just the right way to make all these things work just like creation science says it should have" ?
I see a number of problems with this kind of thinking. First off it has absolutly no support other than you incredulity. That alone is enough to dismiss it. Science operates on what we know and can know. There is no way for science to ever test if a supernatural entity changed the rules mid-stream. We can ALWAYS say, "well things were just different back then." It is an unfalsifiable, unrealistic, and unproductive position to take.
The other problems I can see are more practical.
If the rate of decay changed then it must have changed differently for each different radioactive element so that when the rate changed to their current state that all of the correlating "ages" would line up.
The energy released by radioactive decay would have to change to deal with 4.5 GA worth of decay happening in a few thousand years.
Friction would have to change or be selectivly eliminated to account for the flood. The continents skittering around the globe, the earth turning itself inside out, we can see the effects of just a "mild" tweaking of topography on places like Io and the result is complete and utter chaos where no life could survive. Also in the same vein of friction, the cosmic dust that falls from space would similarly fry the earth if air resistance isn't radically altered.
Meteor impacts across 4.5 GA would all happen in a few thousand years so somehow the way energy is disperssed from colliding objects will have to change. If not, once again the earth is fried. Nevermind all of these things happening at once.
The laws of superposition/crosscutting/etc DO HAVE TO CHANGE even though Faith merely claims it does not. If the flood is to account for any major portion of the geologic column then is currently NO KNOW mechanism for the reverse sorting of material, unconformities, disconformities, erosional surfaces, inclusions, metamorphism, faulting, etc. Laws of gravity probably have to change to accomidate this. Big things fall sometimes faster sometimes slower than small things. It really is kind of chaotic what has to change in order for the flood to create the geologic record "naturally".
Something would have to happen to the Moon to get it to a) not be molten b) be in the position it is in. I suppose there could be some kind of flood mechanism for this. Why not, everything was different right?
I am sure there are many other kinds of things that would have to be different in the past to make YECism work. But I guess if you just take the position that it "had to be different because the Bible is literally true. Except by literal I mean my interpretation of it that ISN'T ACTUALLY literal at all", that really anything goes. Atoms freaking out, gravity flip flopping, frictionless universe, WHATEVER. Anything to make the creation story and the flood a natural event so that YECism can be considered...
...valid.
All I have to say to that is. *ROFLMAO*
Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.
Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)