Are you opening up this debate to include what the qualities are for theories that are "much of a theory"?

I was trying to stay on topic, but you seem to be both bashing others for going slightly off-topic to touch on your tangential claims, AND making lots of off-topic comments of your own. Please set a good example, or stop bashing others for following your example.

Concerning "The Expanding Universe Cosmology", you know pretty well that there is not only a single unified view that explains it. The context is that it is observed, and that there are models that look at the consequences of the onset of expansion that now are mostly in agreement with each other, and with observation.

You bring up the added acceleration, which is in some of these models attributed to Dark Energy. No one knows for certain what Dark Energy is, but I expect that in ten to twenty years we'll have enough observations to have some fairly precise models for the changing rate of expansion to strongly narrow the field of choices. It might be that some ATM theories make some claims as to what will be discovered on this front. There is no unified group that swears they are right about this in the mainstream.

The Expanding Universe Cosmologies do have something to say about the history of the universe, and things that we see. If you take it as given that the universe started expanding 13.7 billion years ago, we should see that there is a not a uniform continuum of star ages, but rather specific eras when more stars were formed than others. Likewise with globular clusters. We do see this. We see that there was a period of peak star forming in the local universe between 5 and 8 billion years ago. We also see that most of the globular clusters formed in an epoch earlier than that. We see that there was an era when quasars were plentiful, and we live in an era when they are very rare. We see other ways that the universe is changing with age as well, and all of these are in good agreement with the various Expanding Universe Models.

The details of the CMB, including its subtle variations are also in good agreement with most of the curent Expanding Universe Cosmologies. The Isotope ratios of the interstellar medium are well predicted by the Expanding Universe Cosmologies. The list goes on. Is it much of a theory? In my judgment, yes it is. I expect all new cosmological and astronomical observations from now on to be consistant with the Expanding Universe. I also expect that in the future we will refine our knowledge of some of the details, and reject some hypotheses that currently form the edge of our knowledge.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak