The Big Bang Proves Creationism, page 4

Some religious believer consistently bury their heads in the sand and refuse to look at the evidence of the most powerful explanation for the origin and state of the universe. Why this is so, can only be put down to dishonest, ignorance or delusion.

The best explanation of the state and origin of the universe is called "Big slam". These ignorant Christians characteristically mis-present Big slam, saying that it explain the origin of life. BB is not an explanation of the origin of life. For that check out abiogenesis (not evolution). Nowhere in the Big slam theory is there any comment for how life came about. (Get this)

What is even more inane is that the objections to Big slam are not scientific, but theological. As far as can be establish, there is now little or no scientific objections to Cosmic Expansion. Evidently, all objections were brushed away with the discovery of Cosmic Microwave Background.

For some of the experts in this area, check out the work of the following;

1) George Smoot, Nobel Laureate on work for CMB,
2) Alan Guth, Originator of the inflationary theory
3) Michio Kaku
4) Neil deGrasse Tyson
5) Alexei Filippenko

6) Steven Weinburg
7) Victor Stenger
8.) Stephen Hawkins
9) Roger Penrose

This is what Wikipedia has to say about what this model is;

The Big slam is the cosmological model of the universe that is best supported by all lines of scientific evidence and observation. As used by scientists, the term Big slam generally refers to the idea that the universe has expanded from a primordial hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past, and continues to expand to this day. Georges Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big slam theory of the origin of the Universe, although he called it his 'hypothesis of the primeval atom'. The framework for the model relies on Albert Einstein's General Relativity as formulated by Alexander Friedmann. After Edwin Hubble discovered in 1929 that the distances to far away galaxies were generally proportional to their redshifts, this observation was taken to indicate that all very distant galaxies and clusters have an apparent velocity directly away from our vantage point. The farther away, the higher the apparent velocity.[1] If the distance between galaxy clusters is increasing today, everything must have been closer together in the past. This idea has been considered in detail back in time to extreme densities and temperatures, and large particle accelerators have been built to experiment on and test such conditions, resulting in significant confirmation of the theory, but these accelerators have limited capabilities to probe into such high energy regimes. Without any evidence associated with the earliest instant of the expansion, the Big slam theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the universe since that instant. The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to Big slam nucleosynthesis.

Fred Hoyle is credited with coining the phrase 'Big slam' during a 1949 radio broadcast, as a derisive reference to a theory he did not subscribe to.[2] Hoyle later helped considerably in the effort to figure out the nuclear pathway for building certain heavier elements from lighter ones. After the discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964, and especially when its collective frequencies sketched out a blackbody curve, most scientists were fairly convinced by the evidence that some Big slam scenario must have occurred.