The matter-antimatter asymmetry should convince even the most zealous big bang believers to re-examine their faith. Generations of physicists have spent their careers trying to prove the biblical origin of the universe, which is in a steady state and had no beginning. This is what the evidence always shows.
The red shifts measured by Hubble (and more recently of supernovas) are ISOTROPIC. This would only be consistent with the big bang theory if the big bang occurred at the position of the observer. Otherwise, we could determine the location where the big bang occurred from the relative motion of the galaxies. Galaxies on the opposite side would be moving away from us, while galaxies on the same side would be moving in the same direction as us. Unfortunately, it has not been possible to determine the location of "ground zero," because the observed red shifts are ISOTROPIC. Whatever is causing this effect, it tends to disprove, not prove, the big bang theory.
When this is pointed out to believers, they revert to a more abstract theory, that "space itself" is expanding uniformly like the surface of a balloon. There was, in fact, no great explosion, or ground zero where the big bang occurred. This abstract theory is the same as arguing the medieval concept of the aether, which was disproven by the Michaelson-Morley experiment. "Space itself" cannot expand, because there is nothing there to expand. Moreover, Einstein's theory of special relativity means that the frame of reference is relative between the observer and observed. It would be hard to reconcile with the concept of an aether; ie. an "expanding universe" or universal frame of reference. This is a hidden flaw in any theory of an expanding universe, which implies a universal frame of reference that exists independent of the observer. To say nothing of how odd it is to use a frame of reference that is changing over time. According to relativity, no frame of reference is preferred over any other.
The other data used to argue the big bang theory, the presence of a nearly isotropic background of microwave radiation, suffers from the same problem. One wonders why the microwaves aren't all heading away from ground zero, the starting point for the big bang. Our own galaxy is racing away from ground zero at lightspeed - isn't this the basic idea of the big bang theory? The fact that the CMB is more or less isotropic tends to disprove that it originated in a big bang, just as the red shift data does.
The big bang theory is a creationist myth. The people promoting this dogma have created a formidable problem for truth tellers, to protect their careers and misguided research. It has already been disproven a dozen ways, yet people continue trying to prove it. Why not just study antimatter and see where the measurements lead?