The evidence for the Big Bang is not just the red-shift. It has multiple lines that actually support each other. For example, the temperature of empty space is what you would expect if a universe expanded about 13 billion years ago. Also the relative abundance of the elements in the universe is a explained very well as a consequence of the Big Bang theory. As we go back in time and look at further away galaxies we can see that the universe changed in composition and type of stars available. One can fill an entire book with the evidence for an evolving cosmos. This article doesn't address all these lines of evidence but it explains that there is a possible loop hole that could account for the red-shift and being consistent with general relativity. But it has more problems that it solves without the explanatory power of the Big Bang theory because it doesn't address all the things the Big Bang theory addresses. Big Bang theory stays perfectly unchallenged. It is just journalistic sensationalism. Giovanni
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:53 AM, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > They are like weather guys... > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Cosmologists are always changing their story! Anyway, what do they know? >> They should stick to cosmetics and hairstyles. >> >> - Jed >> >> >
