Changes

Big bang theories are actually a ''class'' of scientific models that describe the Universe as expanding from a very hot, dense state approximately 13.7 billion years ago<ref>[http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101age.html WMAP Cosmology 101: Age of the Universe]</ref> (although this number has been revised several times throughout recent history). It was first proposed by the Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] and evidence for the expansion was observed by [[Edwin Hubble]]<ref>Hubble, E. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp. 168-173.</ref>. Later [[George Gamow]] predicted that the Big Bang would leave an observable [[cosmic microwave background|microwave background radiation (or CMBR)]]. This radiation was discovered by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson at [[Bell Labs]]; it was found to be close to that predicted by Gamow (Gamow predicted a background radiation level equivalent to a roughly 3&nbsp;K black body object, and the observed level is that of a 2.725&nbsp;K body).

Big bang theories are actually a ''class'' of scientific models that describe the Universe as expanding from a very hot, dense state approximately 13.7 billion years ago<ref>[http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101age.html WMAP Cosmology 101: Age of the Universe]</ref> (although this number has been revised several times throughout recent history). It was first proposed by the Catholic priest [[Georges-Henri Lemaitre]] and evidence for the expansion was observed by [[Edwin Hubble]]<ref>Hubble, E. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp. 168-173.</ref>. Later [[George Gamow]] predicted that the Big Bang would leave an observable [[cosmic microwave background|microwave background radiation (or CMBR)]]. This radiation was discovered by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson at [[Bell Labs]]; it was found to be close to that predicted by Gamow (Gamow predicted a background radiation level equivalent to a roughly 3&nbsp;K black body object, and the observed level is that of a 2.725&nbsp;K body).

The name "Big Bang Theory," was initially a pejorative coined by [[Fred Hoyle]] and used by other steady-state theorists to criticize the concept that the universe had a beginning.  But the Big Bang Theory does not imply an explosion of matter into pre-existing space.  Instead, the theory proposes that time began at that point and space expanded from then on, and more space is constantly created in the interstices between particles as the density of the universe falls.  In other words, the Big Bang describes the expansion of space and time.  Big Bang theorists state that the Hubble [[redshift]] is a consequence of this stretching of the fabric of space.  

The name "Big Bang" was initially a pejorative coined by [[Fred Hoyle]] and used by other steady-state theorists to criticize the concept that the universe had a beginning.  But the Big Bang Theory does not imply an explosion of matter into pre-existing space.  Instead, the theory proposes that time began at that point and space expanded from then on, and more space is constantly created in the interstices between particles as the density of the universe falls.  In other words, the Big Bang describes the expansion of space and time.  Big Bang theorists state that the Hubble [[redshift]] is a consequence of this stretching of the fabric of space.  

Observations of distant supernovae indicate that the Universe is actually undergoing accelerated expansion<ref>Riess, A. G., et al. The Astronomical Journal, Volume 116, Issue 3, pp. 1009-1038.</ref><ref>Perlmutter, S., et al. The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 517, Issue 2, pp. 565-586.</ref> and galaxy surveys<ref>[http://www.sdss.org/dr5/ Sloan Digital Sky Survey]</ref><ref>Tegmark, M., et al. Physical Review D, vol. 74, Issue 12.</ref> and recent observations of the microwave background<ref>[http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe]</ref><ref>See, for example, http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0603449</ref> have allegedly corroborated these claims. Atheists claim that the acceleration is caused by something called '[[dark energy]]', for which there is only observational evidence but no experimental evidence. There is no viable naturalistic explanation of what dark energy is, which even a few atheists admit, yet they insist that dark energy is a naturalistic phenomenon.

Observations of distant supernovae indicate that the Universe is actually undergoing accelerated expansion<ref>Riess, A. G., et al. The Astronomical Journal, Volume 116, Issue 3, pp. 1009-1038.</ref><ref>Perlmutter, S., et al. The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 517, Issue 2, pp. 565-586.</ref> and galaxy surveys<ref>[http://www.sdss.org/dr5/ Sloan Digital Sky Survey]</ref><ref>Tegmark, M., et al. Physical Review D, vol. 74, Issue 12.</ref> and recent observations of the microwave background<ref>[http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe]</ref><ref>See, for example, http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0603449</ref> have allegedly corroborated these claims. Atheists claim that the acceleration is caused by something called '[[dark energy]]', for which there is only observational evidence but no experimental evidence. There is no viable naturalistic explanation of what dark energy is, which even a few atheists admit, yet they insist that dark energy is a naturalistic phenomenon.