Talk:Big bang theory is wrong (Talk.Origins)

Garbled text needs clarifying
"Blue stars are seen to be poor in heavy elements. According to Russell Humphreys' White Hole Cosmology theory, water was expanding out of a white hole. The normal distribution of elements in a gravitational field would naturally result in outer galaxies being poor in heavy elements."

The first sentence is my attempt to make sense of garbled text. Is the second sentence a correct summary of Humphreys's theory? This paragraph is disjointed and needs expansion to show the connecting logic or else complete deletion.

"With regards to dark matter, the observed effects are not predictions, but they are the same inconsistencies that produced the theory in the first place. On the other hand, there are observations that suggest that dark matter does not exist."

Again, I have attempted to correct garbled text; I don't feel the result makes sense yet. There needs to be a reference to the "observations that suggest that dark matter does not exist".

Oelphick 02:25, 6 September 2006 (CDT)