In "The Speed of Matter," by Barry Setterfield, at https://barrysetterfield.org/speedofmatter.html, there is the following statement: (emphasis added)

In TJ 19(3) 2005, there was an article entitled "The Speed of Matter" by Justin K. Taylor ... he concludes that Russell Humphrey's white hole cosmology with its time dilation effects must be correct for a young creation.

Because we have been refused publication in the standard creation journals, even though the article is evidently being written to directly oppose the Setterfield model by name, here is our response to this article in TJ.

... Mr. Taylor concludes that “These observational data ... also indicate that the already-questioned cDK hypothesis, proposed by Barry Setterfield, is not sufficient to solve the entire problem.”

The above is from an article by Barry Setterfield. 

There is no question of the basic right to question any model.

The issue is, presenting one side, while refusing to allow the other to be heard. This is the concern.

Why would a criticism of Setterfield's model be published, while Setterfield himself is denied to respond?

In court, is there just one side presented in a trial? Is defense not allowed to respond to prosecution?

Are secular courts more fair than Christian editors?

The above instance is illustrative of the reason for this site, and the need for this site.