[biblewonk]

It doesn't prove the big bang. It's something that is predicted by big bang theory, and when it was discovered, it was powerful support for the theory. And it's a physical fact that distinguishes big bang theory from its one-time rival, steady-state theory, which is now dis-proved, because it's inconsistent with the CMB.

I have a book called Galaxies, I think that's the one, which states that galaxies are all perfectly evenly distributed throughout the universe exactly as predicted by the Big Bang theory. Isn't it interesting how the BB Theory is updated to predict the latest things observation shows us.

[BikerNYC]

I have a book called Galaxies, I think that's the one, which states that galaxies are all perfectly evenly distributed throughout the universe exactly as predicted by the Big Bang theory.

It's my understanding, and those with more astrophysical experience than I can correct me, that galaxies are not evenly distributed throughout the universe, but are located in fast sheets, as if they were on the surfaces of enourmous bubbles.

Isn't it interesting how the BB Theory is updated to predict the latest things observation shows us.

I can just see you as a cardinal in Rome back in the 13 and 1400s. "First they tell us that planets revolve around the Sun in circles, and then they tell us they revolve around the Sun in eliptical orbits. It's all a bunch of crap. Everyone knows the Sun revolves around the Earth."

[PatrickHenry]

Isn't it interesting how the BB Theory is updated to predict the latest things observation shows us.

Such open-minded flexability is a feature of science, which prevents scientific theories from becoming disprovable, laughable dogma.

[Doctor Stochastic]

The prediction preceded the observation in this case.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Isn't it interesting how the BB Theory is updated to predict the latest things observation shows us.

That's what science does. Religion is the theory that doesn't change when presented with new evidence.