Marcel Luttgens wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ...

[snip]

The only evidence of the Big Bang is written at the observational the
limits of the Universe, namely the CMBR.


Even this is no evidence.

Why not?



It is a mere interpretation.

The Big Bang theory predicted the existence of the CMBR (let's
not quibble about the fact that it didn't predict its temperature right
at first). The CMBR does indeed exist. So, why is this not evidence
for the BBT?

For me, if a theory predicts X, and then X is indeed found, then the
existence of X is evidence for the theory. Do you think otherwise?


Bye,
Bjoern