Nothing has been retracted. You are confusing Big Bang with cosmic inflation...which is how the universe expands. Big Bang theory originally called for a uniform and constant rate of expansion of the universe. Cosmic Inflation called for an expansion that accelerated at faster than light speed. This was the explanation that solved the problem with how matter (stars) were distributed unevenly in the universe. One of the predictions of cosmic inflation was that a gravitational ripple would be created by the expansion. In March a team of scientist believed they discovered that ripple which might be the signature of an accelerated expansion. Other scientist immediately challenged the findings as being possibly excess dust in the cosmic background. Later test validated that was a possibility.
So either way Big Bang stands and was never challenged. We know that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. It was hoped that this discovery would be a signature. But when it turned out to be dust it didn't disprove anything. The universe is still expanding atanaccelerated rate.
It would be the same thing as looking for a signature of gravity, believing you found it, and when discovering you didn't saying that gravity doesn't exist. Because we didn't find the signature doesn't invalidate what we know. I remember your comments back when this happened. I got the feeling then that you took this's some kind of validation that science was wrong on the whole origin thing. Sorry....not this time.
