Before you start throwing proverbial stones at me,
I don't dispute the evidence collected for the BBT so far.
But "interpretation" has always been the "achilles heel" in science.
Admittedly, the evidence does not support either the defunct
Steady State Theory, nor a more recent idea/theory [an unorthodox one] that
the entire cosmos rotates, and we just happen to be in an cosmic suburb
where galaxies, quasars, etc., further out than us from the hypothetical cosmic hub move slower and away from us; while those closer to the hub move faster and also
away from us...That theory has serious flaws according to my interpretation;
and according to maninstream scientists as a whole.
But back to the BBT!
I agree that the 1965 discovery of cosmic microwave background
radiation gave the BBT verifiable information to use as evidence.
And Dr. Hubble's discovery of the redshift of distant galaxies
is another.
But I quote Raoul, here, from months past, when he mused,
"Will the Big Bang Theory go the way of planetary epicycles"?