[[Creation science|Many scientists]] emphasize difficulties with the "big bang" model.<ref>http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm</ref>. Current models of galactic formation in big bang theory cannot explain observed galactic phenomenon<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i3/galaxies.asp</ref>, and the cosmic microwave background, hailed as proof of the big bang and used to calculate the age of the Milky Way, has proven to be something else entirely<ref>http://www.moondaily.com/reports/Big_Bang_Afterglow_Fails_An_Intergalactic_Shadow_Test_999.html</ref>.
+
[[Creation science|Many scientists]] emphasize difficulties with the "big bang" model.<ref>http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/03-ss5.htm</ref>. Current models of galactic formation in big bang theory cannot explain observed galactic phenomenon<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i3/galaxies.asp</ref> (literate people would say phenomena), and the cosmic microwave background, hailed as proof of the big bang and used to calculate the age of the Milky Way, has proven to be something else entirely<ref>http://www.moondaily.com/reports/Big_Bang_Afterglow_Fails_An_Intergalactic_Shadow_Test_999.html</ref>. Of course, one must consider the source of this entirely unproven assertion.
−
The number of supernova remnants in the Milky Way galaxy is consistent with a galaxy which is 7000 years old, not billions of years.<ref>Davies, Keith. ''Distribution of supernova remnants in the galaxy.'' Creation Discovery Project, 1994</ref>.
+
The number of supernova remnants in the Milky Way galaxy is consistent with a galaxy which is 7000 years old, not billions of years,<ref>Davies, Keith. ''Distribution of supernova remnants in the galaxy.'' Creation Discovery Project, 1994</ref> according to a self-serving report with no support in the scientific community.