The article is talking about something that has yet to be verified and if it is what does it matter?
There is zero evidence that the moon was created when a planet crashed into the earth. There is zero evidence of a big bang. It is all theory.
Actually, both of those statements are false. There is in fact a great deal of evidence for each.
Lunar Formation
With respect to the moon, lunar samples indicate the surface of the Moon was once molten, is one. Another is the Moon’s apparently relatively small iron core and a lower density than the Earth, which indicates that it wasn’t created “alongside” the Earth.
Rocks collected during the Apollo Moon landings show oxygen isotope ratios identical to those of Earth which implies that the rocks originated here. The highly anorthositic composition of the lunar crust, as well as the existence of KREEP-rich samples, gave rise to the idea that a large portion of the Moon was once molten, and a giant impact scenario could easily have supplied the energy needed to form such a magma ocean.
Evidence shows that if the Moon has an iron-rich core, it must be small. In particular, the mean density, moment of inertia, rotational signature, and magnetic induction response all suggest that the radius of the core is less than about 25% the radius of the Moon, in contrast to about 50% for most of the other terrestrial bodies.
Impact conditions can be found that give rise to a Moon that formed mostly from the mantles of the Earth and impactor, with the core of the impactor accreting to the Earth, and which satisfy the angular momentum constraints of the Earth-Moon system.
Also, we have evidence of what such an impact looks elsewhere and can see that it is comparable to how things look here. Specifically, warm silica-rich dust and abundant SiO gas, products of high velocity (> 10 km/sec) impacts between rocky bodies has been detected around the nearby (29 pc distant) young (~12 My old) Beta Pic Moving Group star HD172555 by the Spitzer Space Telescope.
Meanwhile, a belt of warm dust in a zone between 0.25AU and 2AU from the young star HD 23514 in the Pleiades cluster appears similar to the predicted results of a collision with the embryonic Earth, and has been interpreted as the result of planet-sized objects colliding with each other. This is similar to another belt of warm dust detected around the star BD +20°307 (HIP 8920, SAO 75016).
There are also several problems with this scenario, but when compared against other lunar creation models, the impact model is the best.
Big Bang
There is a VERY great deal of evidence for Big Bang, ranging from the discovery many years ago that everything in the universe is receding from everything else, to the cosmic background radiation found by Penzius and Wilson.
The model also ties into models about how modern physics (forms of particles, energy and physical laws) would have come into being, and as we test this theory with higher and higher energy cyclotrons, the theory continues to be confirmed.
Again, certainly there are issues with the theory, but it is by far the best theory.
And understand we are using the word “theory” in the scientific sense. We have a theory of electricity, a theory of magnetism, etc. - no one questions whether those theories are correct. We use the word theory because we can not know with 100% certainty because that doesn’t yet exist. The arguments for these tests are inductive (at their base) not deductive.
