5 Alternative Explanations for the Redshift we Observe

I always thought spectroscopy was at best misunderstood and at worst a total fraud. When 'science' is nothing more than observation from a massive distance, then how could anyone truly know what is the correct answer? No one does, meaning the cause of red shifts is not known nor will it ever be and pretending otherwise is just fooling yourself. If you want to fool yourself, go right ahead, but when the powers that be are expending all the resources on their own pet projects rather than engaging in real examination, then collectively we're getting hoodwinked by soothsayers rather than receiving worthwhile scientific input.

If this sounds anti-science or unenlightened, hey, I'm just echoing Edwin Hubble himself: "Yet the reason for the redshift remained unclear. Georges Lemaître, a Belgian Catholic priest and physicist, predicted on theoretical grounds based on Einstein's equations for general relativity the redshift-distance relation, and published observational support for it, two years before the discovery of Hubble's law.^[42] However, many cosmologists and astronomers (including Hubble himself) failed to recognize the work of Lemaître; Hubble remained doubtful about Lemaître's interpretation for his entire life." (thus spake Wikipedia)

Mainstream science refuses to give up its grip on Einstein's general relativity to the point where it has concocted dark energy/dark matter--a theoretical proposition based on nothing more than math--to account for 85% of the entire universe. I can't help thinking if Einstein were alive today, he would've ditched these theories long ago if they needed an 85% correction to make them relevant! But, I'm just a guy that watches too much You Tube.