Re: yeah, well - @David Pollard
You're looking at things on the wrong scale.
The evidence for the Big Bang lies in things like the cosmic background microwave radiation, and galactic red shift. If the laws of physics were slightly different, there could have been a Big Bang which did not result in star formation - except nobody would be around to observe it.
The evidence doesn't only come from very large scales - particle physics shows that, for the present range of known particles to exist, at some time the universe was very hot and dense (replace "very" with "inconceivably" for best effect.) That's because, if that wasn't the case, there would never have been a stage at which the necessary quark soup existed to crystallise out into hadrons as the universe cooled. It is exactly the same way that we can tell that certain rocks were once extremely hot, because of the way that they have crystallised.
From different ends, then, we know that at one time the universe was extremely small and hot, and that it is currently expanding; we can also detect the fossil radiation from the extremely hot stage. There are plenty of books which give a much, much fuller explanation, and I'm only posting this extremely superficial overview because without it you might not realise the kind of evidence they will be discussing, and how compelling it is.