[AJames]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

My views as to my difficulties with the big bang are as stated above... but having said such my mind is not closed and in truth most all I read relates to my interest in cosmology and frankly the more I read the more unconvinced I become of anything..

I have no doubts that you or many other in this thread do have open minds, who do totally agree that we must make decisions based on truth and reality.
Yet we must be cautious when we do so, because through words we can easily misrepresent the arguments and instead instil beliefs based on religious dogma or unsubstantiated evidence. Sometimes this is far more difficult to assess if we just take things on face value.
Application of the scientific method in cosmological papers is tantamount that we establish theories on observations - therefore establishing new theories to expand our knowledge. In cosmology's case the hardest thing is that the results are written in the complex language of mathematics, which in most people's minds (including mine), we do not fully understand.
Therefore it is hard to disagree or agree (or even challenge the theory) without much study and understanding of the issues.
Challenging the cosmological views is not easy for us novices. However, some do consider themselves on an equal par to the principle cosmologists, and people like Lerner continue to hammer from multi directions to enforce there own views based on either personal, metaphysical or religious principles.
An analogy here is something like a cork on a wavy sea. The waves might look like they are travelling somewhere, but the cork is instead really only moving up and down at the same place and is going nowhere.
One of the biggest dangers are the Creationists who believe Archbishop Usser's view that the Earth was created on 21st October 4004 BC. This clearly contradicts the Big Bang or an expanding universe model - due to the fact that such an occurrence would mean that a 6000 year Earth and universe should be evidently be little different from now and just after the creation. Such proponents of this view therefore conclude - based really on faith - the cosmology and the Big Bang is wrong.
These buggers are smart though - and often deeply hide their motives without disclosure - meaning you cannot clearly know is they are being upfront. Sadly this means we must also look closely at their stated credentials and works (in most cases of oddly "missing" - another clue.) Other clues is the use of complex terms and negative criticisms without the necessary balanced support of other the contrary views or current held theory. Thus we must must be skeptical.
While Lerner's "Alternative Cosmology" looks convincing and knowledgeable he is not being totally up-front.

Andrew