Ok, I guess I'm a bit bored right now, and have a couple of minutes on my hands, etc, so let's just try one simple logic experiment, shall we...
Currently the observable universe is 92-93 billion light years large, right...?
Well, current data/projections say that the entire thing, if there is even a limit to the entire thing, is at least 200 times larger than that, correct...? So let's just use that lower number/estimate for right now shall we...?
200 times 92 is... 18 trillion 400 billion light years large, correct...? So, tell me how that all got there from one single origin point, or only one single BB, when it is only supposed to be 13.8 billion years old, or only happened just only 13.8 billion years ago, etc...?
It had to expand very, very rapidly, like almost beyond belief rapidly, to be from just one single origin point (single singularity) in that amount of time, and then nearly halted all of the suddenly, like fictional Star Wars aircraft coming out of hyperspace, for that to all be true and correct and for that to happen that way, etc, there is not enough time for gradual deceleration either, the time is just too small, and the universe too large, etc...
It's a very clear logic contradiction, as we know the universe did not do that, (either one of those things) and especially since it is still supposed to be speeding up in that expansion or acceleration still supposedly, etc...
The numbers and the data (and the pictures), etc, do not match, and as of right now, there is absolutely no evidence at all for the BB, age of the universe maybe, "maybe", but not the BB, etc...
If it as only as old as they say it is, but is also the size they say it must be (and we are using the "lower number estimates", etc) then it could not have all started out as a single singularity, or from one single origin point, etc, but would have to have started already laid or spread out already, etc, if it is only as old as the current orthodoxy insists that it is, etc, because it just cannot be otherwise, not unless it is much, much, much (and did I say "much"), anyway, much, much older than they currently say it is, because only then, can any kind of BB, even be remotely possible at this point, etc...
I need to do more research as to just exactly what point in time the BB was first suggested/thought of, and what amount of data they had at that time, but I can absolutely guarantee you that they thought the universe was a lot smaller at that time, and it is outdated now due to how large we now know it at least has to be at least now, etc...
And at risk of starting to repeat myself all over again now, I'm going to stop there for now, ok...
This is not all I know or have to say about it (the universe) either, etc, but there is "more", etc...
Problem is a lot of them call for a drastic change in thinking, and maybe even complete desolution of some current models, etc...
God Bless!