Aardsma has long since been refuted. In fact, one man walked into the room where Aardsma was working on the article and showed him what he was doing wrong. Aardsma didn't care. But if you want a clue, take a look at the grid Aardsma used and compare it to the actual measurements.
A number of other constants have been measured as changing. But you would actually have to read the work to know that, wouldn't you? Because this is definitely not your field, is it?
And yes, as an editor and peer reviewer, I do know what it is all about. Perhaps better than you do....
Barry, by the way, did not randomly change anything. He reported the data and analyzed it statistically. Daniel Dzimano, a co-author of one of his papers last year, is a Ph.D. in math.
I can see from your ranting that you really don't have a clue what you are talking about, actually.
In the meantime, unless this thread goes back to its original topic, I will lock it by the end of today.