Is The Scientific Community Aware Of The Extraordinary Confusion Over Big Bang’s Expansion Redshifts?

The scientific community widely understands that expansion redshifts are the centerpiece of big-bang cosmology. What is generally unknown is the widespread confusion in the ranks of cosmologists as to exactly what they are. A minority equate them with Doppler shifts due to actual recession. A majority, however, claim: (i) “... the [expansion] redshift does not really have anything to do with velocities at all in cosmology,” (ii) “... it is common but misleading to convert a large redshift to a recession velocity using the special-relativistic formula 1 + z = √ (1 + v/c)/(1− v/c) ,” and (iii) “The truth is that expansion redshifts are totally different from Doppler redshifts, and the velocities catalogued by astronomers are not the recession velocities used in the velocity-distance law.” Has the scientific community been victimized by astronomers as the foregoing implies? Or is it instead that the expansion redshift concept is flawed? This paper shows it’s the latter, that it was accepted without ever being tested. In fact modern physics knows nothing of expansion’s redshifts and their presumed origin due to expanding space rather than Doppler recession. Should We Believe the Big Bang Scenario? is the title of the side-bar in Martin Rees’s recent review of big-bang cosmology [1]. He has done