Evidence against the Big Bang

He has somewhat scrapped rule 2, but I will let it pass since I did not define explicitly the terms. I. CMBR Data a. The horizon problem There is a uniform radiation temperature of around 2.7260K +-0.0013K[1]. If indeed the speed of light c is constant, then this data creates a light-time-travel problem. This has been partially addressed by Alan Guth. He proposed that the singularity expanded, "inflated," incredibly fast in the past and then slowed down to the present speed. Now this creates problems of its own. How did the inflation start? What was its cause? How did it slow down? What opposing force was there? b. Untenable assumptions and bad data. This assumption is that foreground contamination is frequency dependent, while the anisotropy is independent of frequency. This is untestable, and hence untenable. [6] WMAP satellite data, which is CMBR data, is also within the error range of radiological instruments. c. CMBR data can be explained as due to local radiation The ~70mK anisotropies, commonly regarded as proof of the Big Bang, can be attributed to other effects such as the Sunyaev"Zel"dovich effect. (SZE) [3] Analysis have found that the cooling due to the shadowing effect falls short of prediction by 100mK. On the average of 31 clusters, no shadow has been detected. This shows that CMBR has a higher possibility of being local radiation and radiation is coming from within the clusters, rather than BR. II. Time Dilation in Quasars Time dilation is the effect whereby events occurring far away appear to occur slower than nearby events [4][5]. This is caused by the lengthening of light pulse intervals as space expands. BB predicts that all events would be affected by time dilation. Quasars, however, give off light pulses at the same rate no matter their distance from the Earth. Light signatures of 6 billion light years away (blya) and 10 blya were found to be the same. [6] Even though redshifts were drastically different, the time taken for the light to reach Earth was the same. So how does this have any reference to the Big Bang? Well, the Big Bang relies on the expansion of the Universe [7]. This is evidence against the expansion of the Universe. III. Redshifts in Quasars. Halton Arp has made the observation [8] that highly redshifted quasars can be seen to interact physically with relatively lower redshifted galaxies. From this observation, Arp claims that redshifts are caused primarily by a young object, not by its velocity. (See last picture of [9]) We can check this claim by analysing the pictures. Magnification of the pictures show, as stated in [10], that there is a "jet" of matter connecting NGC 7319 and the quasar. Thus, redshifts are caused by youth, not by velocity. The biggest evidence for Big bang universal expansion is redshifts. The evidence of redshifts in quasars due to youngness contradicts the other evidences. So this is rather a short debate opening, you may begin rebutting. (I propose that no addition of evidences be made, because according to the rules I cannot debate them :D) 1. . http://iopscience.iop.org... 2. . http://www.ptep-online.com... 3. . http://arxiv.org... 4. . http://arxiv.org... 5. . http://phys.org... 6. Ref 4 7. . http://arxiv.org... 8. . http://electric-cosmos.org... 9. Ibid. 10. Ibid.