Issues of light

Actually, Humphries has addressed all critiques brought against his theory. He has answers posted on both the AiG and ICR websites. None of the "faults" have stood up to scrutiny. In fact, were there any problems it would be just as bad for the Big Bangers because his theory uses the exact same mathematics as that which produced the BB theory. He just starts with a different initial assumption (yes, the BB theory is based on an arbitrary assumption)

The assumption is that the universe is infinite and unbounded. Using this assumption with GR the BB theory falls out. Using the assumption that the universe is finite and bounded with GR, Humphries White-hole cosmology falls out. Both are arbitrary assumptions based on the believers philosophy.

This is completely incorrect. Humphries use of GR also explains an expanding universe and the background radiation with his starting assumption. (Actually the background temperature of the universe was predicted long before Penzias and Wilson came along. In fact, their first measurements based on a BB cosmology gave to high of a background radiation and they later "fixed" the prediction to fit the data.)

Percy said, "This is just a restatement of your initial assertion."
This is also incorrect, your previous post stated that, "Hubble's discovery of the expanding universe and Wilson and Penzias's discovery of the BB background radiation tells us that white-hole
cosmology doesn't match the observational evidence." Implying that Humphrey's (are you happy?) cosmology doesn't and can't deal with these observed phenomena. Perhaps if you had read his papers (have you?) you would know that one of the chief things he stated was that any cosmology that doesn't deal with observed phenomena cannot be considered as a viable alternative. His cosmology does deal with these observed phenomena and provide explanations for them within his white-hole cosmology framework. Your assertion that background radiation and universal expansion somehow prove his cosmology wrong is at best uninformed and at worst an outright lie. For more info on observational evidence that agrees with Humphrey's cosmology see the following:
Missing Link | Answers in Genesis
Astronomy | Answers in Genesis