The big bang has already been debunked with that new satellite, they found galaxies that would have predated the big bang, and others were lacking traits that would be required. That theory has been in trouble for a long time, relativity itself along with the redshift was the source of the universal expansion... but when the observations did not line up with the theory, instead of revisiting the hypotheses science reified the theory by adding dark matter and then later dark energy (as in matter and energy that can't be directly measured).

The root of this all is at least as old as the debates between the aether theories and materialist theories, the materialist view taking shape at the origins of what is now called science which was formed as a means to explain the universe without appeals to "God". This view carries into quantum physics, which is at scales that can't be directly SEEN, so they start with the double-slit experiment and see that the light is interfering with itself, but quantized light is called a "photon" and the only way it could interfere with itself is if it travels as a wave until it reaches the target... this is accepted as fact, but the ONLY interpretation that is rejected outright is the implications that the universe could not exist without an "observer" to "collapse the waveform potential universe into an actual physical universe".

Digging into just how much of modern science relies on reifications of observations and estimates that, while useful, are only approximations of reality or mathematical models for reality as opposed to reality itself, it becomes a real mind-fuck when it calls into question virtually all that is KNOWN (as in drilled in at a very young age), particularly when you come to learn that even the big names in science draw certain conclusions for philosophical reasons over any objective rationale.