Originally posted by bradybaker
I have never come across any research that would suggest that the 'theory' of red shift is incorrect. They teach that concept in high school physics, its not exactly controversial. In fact, it is one of the many observations that imply the age of the universe to be 13.7 billion years. The consistency of these observations is generally a very good sign.
That is even further troubling when one considers the mass supercluster complexes, which could not have possibly formed in only 13.7 billion years.

It has been shown and observed by a number of astrologers that there are stars with very high redshift values (thought to be receding rapidly and located at a great distance) which are known to be connected with galaxies that have a very low redshift and are thought to be close by. I don't think they want to disprove redshift theory, but want to show that is cannot be applied on a galactic scale. To some this means the BB theory completely falls apart. To others this means that redshift in cosmology should be rejected, but not the BB theory... that is the basis for the BB theory needs to be rethought.

Here is a website that I came across that lays out a few counter arguments to the BB theory:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020803151341/...l.net/skeptica/

Though specifically on redshift, you might find this article more interesting:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020818195635/...e/redshift.html

Originally posted by bradybaker+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bradybaker)</div>
<!--QuoteBegin-dream&#045;scape
I am not all that interested in discussing the origins of this universe as it is irrelevant to more important issues.
Such as...? I get the impression that you really don't like me very much.[/b]
I get that same feeling from you sometimes, like you feel everything I write is somehow a personal attack on you

Issues more important than the origin of this universe? There are many but here are a few: the Darfur genocide happening right now; my personal growth and well being; the well being of people around me; the happiness and well being of my family; the suffering throughout the world.

Nothing against you, but it is just my own belief that arguing over the origins of this universe is irrelevant to helping to make the world a better place.

In any case, I am not in opposition of the theory you have put forth that the universe is beginning-less and endless, being "born" and then "dying" and thus giving birth again, infinitely in the past and future. In fact this is pretty much in complete agreement with the cosmology that the spirituality I most closely follow has been teaching for thousands of years.

However, I rarely debate or argue about it, as it is also viewed as being irrelevant to more important issues of the world. I agree with that. Supposing we had a drawn out argument, and one of us came out the victor and the other the loser, supposing a victor and loser could even emerge, now knowing the origin of the universe, I would be in no better or worse position to help people than I was before.