Rezwan wrote: Were you hoping for specific, causal factors in response to your post?

The message in BBNH as an alternative explanation for star and galaxy formation is overwhelmingly more reasonable than the big bang. Yet 18 years later the book might as well not exist at all.

The question is has anything happened in the intervening 18 years to refute BBNH?

The big bang theory was on the ropes in 1991. Now it seems to be unshakable. What rabbit did they pull out of their hat to cement their control of mainstream science?

-Dave