From the link, I first read Friedmann's indented analysis, and I was OK with it. However, I never checked the math because I assumed Freidman had. After all he does have some credentials. I wrote it off to "interesting" coincidence. LOL
I assume he wrote that for the "choir members" who would not actually check dates and facts. And hey, if it misses the actual dates here and there by a few billions of years give or take, well it does get the point across and does describe a time line of sorts. Close enough for government work (or Christian purposes), as they say.
The problem is that it's got to be right (as opposed to spiritually inspiring) to be credible. If it's wrong, as this one appears to be, it has no scientific value. I enjoyed the read. Thanks.
