Is there definitive evidence for an expanding universe?

Creation Ministries International ^ | 8-19-14 | John G. Hartnett

[fishtank]

Redshifted. The spectral lines for this element still show the same distinctive pattern, but all have been shifted towards the red end of the spectrum.

[Red Badger]

If it is expanding, what is it expanding into?.....................

[WayneS]

I’m not sure whether the universe is expanding, but on this planet there is ample evidence that stupidity is expanding.

[TexasGator]

“If it is expanding, what is it expanding into?.....................”

I don’t care where we are going .... Just let me know when we get there.

[pallis]

Yes there is. Global warming.

[fireforeffect]

Chris Cristie?

[Dallas59]

The evidence is all around us....

[Usagi_yo]

The Hubble constant?

[dartuser]

If it is expanding, what is it expanding into?

Nothing

Sounds like a Pink Floyd Album title ...

Creation at the edge of nothing.

[Red Badger]

[ThomasMore]

“but on this planet there is ample evidence that stupidity is expanding.”

LOL

[I want the USA back]

There is no “before” the big bang: the theory can not explain how the “universe the size of a pea, and unbelievably dense” came into existence.
So the theory is useless.

[DJ MacWoW]

Did You Know?

The Current FReepathon Pays For The Current Quarter's Expenses?

Now That You Do, Donate And Keep FR Running

[Ghost of SVR4]

There is no “before” the big bang:

Not in this dimension anyway.

[ctdonath2]

Article is very poor reasoning, embarrassing to the cause of creationism. It basically accepts “Big Bang” proof, then discounts it because a few flippant observations don’t instantly and uniformly match a brief summary of the theory, while flatly ignoring the sensible interpretation.

Example:
He observes the reality of “red shift” as a strong indicator of distance in an expanding universe, then rejects it because relatively fast-moving material exhibits a shift different than relatively stationary material, then because a sensible exception does not match the general description he rejects the entire “red shift indicates distance and therefore indicates chronology” reasoning, while completely failing to offer a sensible alternative explanation of redshifting - a rather stupid line of reasoning.

[Paulie]

Physics is not my area, but I understood from those far smarter than I that the evidence shows the universe is not only expanding, but expanding at an accelerated pace.

Since the expansion is speeding up, that alone calls into serious question the validity of the so called ‘big bang’ theory.

Maybe someone can confirm or refute.

[Dead Corpse]

There is evidence of motion, but we have far to small a data sample to say definitively which way things are going.

Article is full of derp...

[dangerdoc]

There are many data points. They are basically consistent, no matter which direction you look, things are moving away.

[notdownwidems]

Since the expansion is speeding up, that alone calls into serious question the validity of the so called ‘big bang’ theory.

Not necessarily...new research on the 'dark energy' that some researchers say inhabits two-thirds of the universe would confirm the 'big bang'...however, it also means that, at some point, the universe would end it's expansion and begin contracting, at some point in the distant future (a trillion years?) creating another singularity, paving the way for another big bang possibly?

[BitWielder1]

There is plenty of rather convincing evidence of an expanding universe.
Definite evidence? Is there such a thing?
There are alternate explanations but they too need to be confirmed by observations, so far none has.