Some people don't like heavy metal, but who would have chucked nine billion years worth? Led by a University of Indiana astronomer, a study of fifteen entire galaxies contradict the standard model of star and galaxy formation which claims that as billions of years pass during star evolution, they're supposed to create way more heavier metals than these trillion or so stars possess. See this at Space.com and see our debate with theoretical physicist (emphasis on the theoretical) Lawrence Krauss at RealScienceRadio.com/big-bang.
Nine billion years of missing metal in a trillion stars
Here's the Point: We are not talking here about whether a particular meteor may or may not crash into a lesser moon of Jupiter. This is a big-picture prediction that flows naturally from the most fundamental claims of the Big Bang model. When major predictions of a theory are contradicted by enormous quantities of data (in this case, by a trillion stars), the case therefore can be made that the public's confidence in the underlying theory is undeserved.