The ‘Big Bang’ never made sense to me. It’s wonderful to see this theory taught as fact in all public schools finally crumble.

This does NOT disprove the Biblical creation account as Rivero, still an atheist suggests. God made everything as is. He made Adam, the trees and the garden full grown in their places on Earth. There was no need for our Creator to create matter together in one area and then explode it out, where multiple billions of stars (our sun being an average sized star) somehow ended up being perfectly formed and function independently of one another, displaying their light across the universe for thousands of years now.

An explosion would destroy what God made. And the tremendous gravity of all of the matter in the universe in one tiny area would have crushed everything unless God would have changed how gravity now works.

The most logical explanation for creation is that God created everything near where it currently is. Everything was full grown, ready to go. Then God put Adam in charge of the full grown Garden.

– –

THE “BIG BANG” IS JUST RELIGION DISGUISED AS SCIENCE

UPDATE: Dark matter still MIA after most exhaustive search yet

UPDATE: No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

UPDATE: Universe is Not Expanding After All, Controversial Study Suggests

by Michael Rivero

… In 1929, a Cal-Tech astronomer named Edwin Hubble observed that objects which appeared to be much further away showed a more pronounced shift towards the red end of the spectrum. …

UPDATE: BIG BANG EVIDENCE STARTS TO CRUMBLE

A dusty mistake? ‘Groundbreaking’ Bicep2 Big Bang signal was just interstellar debris in the galaxy, scientists reveal

‘There Was No Big Bang’: Brazilian Scientist Turns Cosmic Theory Upside Down A scientist in Brazil has proposed a way of overcoming the problem presented by the Big Bang theory, the need for the singularity of spacetime, by doing away with the theory altogether.

So pervasive is this bias to see the universe as created in a Biblical-consistent “Big Bang” that when William G. Tifft submitted his first article on the quantization of the observed Red Shift to Astrophysical Journal, the Journal published it because they could not find errors in it, yet still felt compelled to editorially distance themselves from the conclusions.

The conclusions derived from quantized red shift are devastating to the conventional view of the universe created in a single Big Bang, as devastating as Galileo’s first telescope was to the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe.

Georges Lemaître (like Aristotle) assumed there was no other explanation for the red shift he observed than the motion of the observed objects relative to Earth. But given the theory that the universe is expanding uniformly, the amount of red shifts would have to be uniformly and randomly distributed.

But they aren’t.

The observed red shifts in the sky are quantized, falling into discreet intervals. This is not explainable by the theory that the red shift is produced solely by relative velocity as the distances to remote objects are uniformly distributed. Some other effect must be at work. And that means that the assumption that the universe is expanding based solely on the red shift is invalidated. Some other effect IS at work that explains the observations, quite possibly one that triggers a quantized red shift over vast distances without respect to relative velocity.

Which means the universe is not expanding. Which means there was no moment of creation, no “Big Bang”…. [No “Big Bang” does NOT mean “no moment of creation.” It actually makes more sense for God to just create the universe as it is, instead of starting from an explosion, which would have been order from chaos. – editor]

STORY