From this article here]
Contrary to the prediction of the Big Bang theory, they found that the surface brightnesses of the near and far galaxies are identical. These results are consistent with what would be expected from ordinary geometry if the Universe was not expanding, and are in contradiction with the drastic dimming of surface brightness predicted by the expanding Universe hypothesis.What about the red shift?
Therefore if the Universe is not expanding, the redshift of light with increasing distance must be caused by some other phenomena – something that happens to the light itself as it travels through space.More from here] The Myth of the Red Shift:
Lemaître's relativistic cosmology was based on the belief that the universe was created from a "primeval atom" and the radius of the universe increases over time because of the explosion from the creation event. Lemaître (1927, 1931a,b) proposed, therefore, that the expansion of the universe explains the redshift of galaxies following the "creation." Lemaître derivation antedated Hubble's formulation by two years. Even so, it became known as Hubble's law and provided the numerical value of the Hubble constant which in turn has been employed to describe the hypothetical expansion rate and age and size of the universe (Hubble 1936a, 1937a,b, 1953). There is however, nothing constant about the "Hubble Constant" which initially predicted the universe was expanding at a rate of about 160 km/sec per million-light-years (Lerner 1991; Mitchell 1997). This expansion rate meant the universe had been created 2 billion years ago. When it was subsequently determined that Earth was over 4 billion years old, and thus 2 billion years older than the Big Bang (BB), the Hubble Constant was adjusted and then adjusted again, and adjusted yet again as yet more discomfirming evidence began to pour in (Lerner 1991; Mitchell 1997; Van Flandern 2004). The "Hubble Constant" therefore, has been repeatedly and continually falsified. And yet, the proponents of BB theology continue to cling to this measure which essentially means whatever they want it to mean. Hubble's Law/Constant, and thus estimates as to the age and supposed expansion rate of the universe are also predicated on a complete and purposeful misinterpretation of a phenomenon referred to as "standard candles" (distant galaxies whose absolute luminosity supposedly does not vary with distance) and "red shifts" i.e. the changes in the wavelengths of light as an object moves toward or away from an observer (Hubble 1929, 1930, 1936a,b; Hubble and Humason, 1931, 1934; Hubble and Tolman 1935). The concept of "red shift" is based on the Doppler effect; i.e. wave lengths of light contract or expand as they approach and then speed toward or away from Earth. Thus, for red shifts to have any meaning, the Earth becomes the center of the universe; which, of course, is absurd.Illusion of an accelerating universe?
Gravitational red shift due to a universe-in-mass black hole, is responsible for the illusion of an accelerating universe. This universe-in-mass black hole model not only explains why distant galaxies have a greater velocity than those closer to Earth, but the dim illumination and red shifts of those distant stars.The infinite universe and life?
Yet, in an infinite universe, over infinite time, and given infinite chance combinations, it can be predicted that the constituent elements necessary for fashioning an energy-extracting, self-replicating molecule may have been jumbled together infinite times. In an infinite, eternal universe with no beginning and no end, the odds are that life would arise not just once, but infinite times, and in infinite locations. Given infinite chance combinations over infinite time, it can also be deduced that an infinite variety of life may have been created, and that not all life forms in the universe are like those of Earth. Life on this planet may be just a sample of life's possibilities.Occam's razor:
Relying on the concept of "Occam's razo" ("entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity"), the simplest explanation is not that the universe was created by unknown forces and for unknown reasons that can't be explained with physics but only with supernatural constructs. Nor it is necessary to invent convoluted theoretical appendages to paper over the glaring holes in Big Bang theology, or to invent phantom forces to explain why distant galaxies are accelerating. The universe is infinite, eternal, peppered with holes which continually destroy, recreate, and recycle matter, liberating then assembling elementary particles, and creating hydrogen atoms, which leads to stars, which collapse, forming black holes which consume and destroy and then recreate matter, and in so doing creates all the necessary chemicals, elements, metals, and gasses necessary for the creation and evolution of life. It is an infinite cycle which has been ongoing for all eternity. The Big Bang is a myth. The Big Bang is religion masquerading as science. The universe was not created. There is no creator god. The living universe is infinite and eternal, continually recycles itself, and has no beginning, and, no end.:lol: