"it fits in with their ideology of scientism"

No, it fits in with the math.
https://youtu.be/lr-DB3Z_5_c

However, i agree that "dark matter" and "dark energy" are just "placeholders" for something we don't yet understand. The math might be wrong. The observations might be wrong. The assumptions might be wrong. We just don't know yet.

Lack of human understanding is not proof of God.
-

Praise God the Almighty divine creator of all things that Mr Lucky is gone, That just could be a good place for him possibly. I don't say I have all the answers just what I feel in my spirit to be truth, It is sad some do not have the ability to feel certain things.

How old are you kiddo? I don't understand why you use the name Noah Luck. You should maybe re-think that too with your brilliance. Earth is not 6000 years old and it did not create from a big bang like the guvment money grubber scientific minds like to "preach."

Now, here's a speculation worth considering: the notion of the speed of light as being a constant is starting to be questioned by more and more scientists/cosmologists, but they are still very much in the minority.

What do you mean by "questioned"? I don't care how many scientists say "I don't think so." I want to know why they don't think so.

Nevertheless, if it is ever demonstrated that the speed of light is slowing down, this will make the speculations about dark energy, dark matter, and other cherished hypotheses collapse like the proverbial house of cards.

When I see that demonstration, I will give it due consideration. Until then, it is not due any consideration at all.

[Apologies for the delayed response. For some reason, I didn't notice your reply when you made it.]

Hypothetical evidence doesn't weigh against anything. Nothing counts as evidence unless it's an actual fact.

I have done much reading, over many decades, about the evolution of scientific thinking about the (a) conditions necessary for life and (b) the likely processes of stellar and planetary formation. I have come across no facts that are inconsistent with a high probability of some kind of life existing on some worlds other than this one.

Well, fine. However, in coursing through the possible scenarios that this universe came from nothing, I find that no argument of how this "just happened" having any more merit than a Creator caused it to occur. No difference.

All the laws and physics that exist in this universe are so select that only with this odd sets of physics and chemistry can life exist.

And just as weirdly, even eerily, all the previous dominant species on this planet met their demise in unbelievable events that not just occurred but wiped them out COMPLETELY so they couldn't stage a come-back.
All obviously coincidences that just happened......... so that the self-centered spoiled could point their fingers at themselves. hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.........whew, that almost killed me.

Objective/honest scientists admit they have no real evidence for the speculation.

What speculation are you referring to?

I accept your admission of defeat

I made no such admission.

I accept your admission of defeat, especially by your making a bogus claim, and also throwing in a cheap shot suggestion in a feeble attempt to discredit the undeniable truth of the following:

Objective/honest scientists admit they have no real evidence for the speculation.

This is not a matter of disagreement, but objective science. Only subjective/dishonest scientists claim to have real evidence when no such evidence currently exists. Perhaps such evidence will be found in the future, but it does not yet exist. Basic science 101.

Oh well. Enjoy wallowing in the darkness of your own making, and nice try at the red herring off point to avoid the sole context of the true statement. :-) The truth hurts all those not committed to pursuing it honestly, or who don't like it if it exposes the errors of what some merely want to be the case.