Expansion, the new evidence of gravity waves and misinterpreting data

http://time.com/27385/so-what-exactly-is-cosmic-inflation-anyway/
This is a fun article insofar as it goes, which is nowhere.  I dare say that I'm not right about my theories, but since they are my theories, I look on all this (from my relativistic pedestal) as so much balderdash and self back scratching, something that makes my blood boil, if only because these scientists and their literary toadies would say such outlandish things about so much based on something technologically extraordinary, but theoretically less than the proof that gravity curves light.
It doesn't help that faster than light expansion was covered some days ago in this self same blog not only as something which occurred 14 billion years ago (give or take a few zillion hours) but occurred just now, yesterday and tomorrow and with a scientific basis that, were I inclined to write quicker would have come out even before this from another perspective in my entries on the looking glass.  But I am forced to digress as the "Stanford Cabal" have taken their admittedly clever observations and instead of pointing out that it is entirely consistent with non-linear time theory, are using it to attempt to bolster their antiquated ideas of the universe.
In this regard it is important to note that even their periodical toting toadies say they only go back to .0000(some additional zeros)1 to the beginning of the universe and how mysterious it is before that when I can go back a complete layer of the onion.
And nothing in this article "explains why we are here" as the article would have us accept.  It doesn't explain why time goes non-linear, it just says, oh look, gravity "waves" and "space expanding faster than the speed of light which is ok, but why is it ok?  Even Non Linear Time admits that while it explains these things, it only does so by creating questions about what the environment of non linearlity is.
These observations merely show that something happened, hardly does the sight of something explain why it exists.  Now I am so full of self righteous self righteousness that I dare say that I am tempted to take my chapters from the other side of the looking glass (yes, the OTHER SIDE) and just delete them.  Oh, but wouldn't the cabal love that, so they could relish in their unexplained space expansion which their toadies say is explained, the higgs bosons which don't exist because there is no gravity carrier, gravity being only one of the three tendencies of time to go non-linear (yes, one of three, why on earth I waste my time telling you about other two and how they look from the other side of the looking glass is beyond me because my ramblings are lost among the nonsense that the common scientific rabble spout out all over the internet.
That isn't to say that there wasn't expansion, at least apparent if not actual, but to add insult to injury, these technological buffoons spout the buffonery about how amazing it is that 200 years of scientific exploration could yield "these amazing results" when 2500 years ago before alternating current and without even the most primitive (not to mention something as evolved as the telescopes used to observe these disruptions) was even invented, the ancient Greeks had figured out it was all an illusion.
There are, so many misstatements and misconceptions in these articles that it is difficult to find a grain of something worthwhile in them, the grain being that they were prognoticated and turned out to exist (like the curvature of light by gravity)...but, of course, my complaints are only according to non-linear time theory.  From the Cabal's point of view, it's all terribly consistent as they continue to insist they have evidence of particles that don't exist and, I have to give them this, they admit to quantum gravity; although they are "baffled as to why it is quantum and not otherwise" except that they have this wonderful "higgs boson" which is all around but impossible to find.  Of course in NLT, quantum this and that is easy to understand since everything can come from a single nlt and therefore is quantized of necessity, but Lord forbid (the lord also being at least potentially defined by NLT) they'd give credit to NLT which explains all of this when they have all their multi-dimensional explanations that are convoluted that the defy the principle that things should be as simple as the can be and no more complicated than they need to be because then, of course, they'd have to let me speak at one of their afternoon teas which would certainly upset the tea cart.
But I ramble on...