Of course the observations are not new. What is new is the explanation of how the characteristics of the light curve vary with redshift.The essence of David’s argument can be found in figure 2 and in figure 3:

Figure two plots the light curve widths of supernova (type 1a) as they explode over time. David has used a templating process just like researchers in the field, but without correction for time dilation. What he has plotted is the light curve widths in multiple wavelengths verses time. Notice that they are almost, but not quite, normally distributed about the x-axis, which is what you would expect to see if there was a small selection effects towards brighter events with increasing distance. But this is NOT the normal distribution one expects to see if redshifted space is also corrected for relativistic effects – this is the red line in David’s plot. If supernova events are consistent over time, the light curve widths should be normally distributed about the red line in David’s plot.

I have plotted a distribution curve for supernova based upon the magnitude lost in 15 days, which is inversely correlated with light curve width, and concluded the same thing: light curves are normally distributed if you do not correct the width for time dilation, but they appear to be absurdly smaller with increasing distance after correcting for time dilation.

There is no reason to look at the statistical significance of David ‘s plot: The ‘red line’ expected by the current cosmology so utterly fails to follow the observational data that it is obvious there is a gross error in the way supernova are analyzed. Cosmologists such as Ned Wright are completely aware of this phenomenon, and to the best of my knowledge they are still trying to understand it. I am surprised the trend has been so constant.

Figure three is a plot of the calculated absolute magnitude of supernova events when their light curve widths are correlated with local events. Here again it is clear that without the time dilation included in the magnitude calculation, the distant supernova events have very near the same average intensity as local events, but when time dilation is included the absolute magnitude appears to be decreasing dramatically if not absurdly.

Again, these are not new observations, just an extension of the ‘weirdness’ of supernova data that has persisted for two decades. A similar trend is apparent in gamma ray burst data, but it is currently to widely scattered to draw hard conclusions.