Which of the following has not yet been proven but will add support to the Big Bang Theory if true?

Proven is a relative term. I am not opposing the theory, but even the greatest scientists will admit that human understanding of the universe is anything but complete. The history of science should tell us that much of what science was "sure" of in the past has long since been revoked. I love science but human arrogance must not cloud our mindset. Imagine what scientist will say about our feeble understanding of the universe 500 years from now. There is a reason it is called the big bang THEORY. If this is for a homework question, you could argue most of these points. Is their a proven scientific definition of abundance? Yes we understand that there are a trillion trillion trillion etc light elements. Do you believe that there is only 15 or 16 heavy elements? When did they determine how the four forces of physics exsisted as we now know them? I have read that there may have been less at some point, and we don't have any clue if somehow, somwhere in spacetime they might shift again. How can one define a percentage of "ordinary" matter when we have no grasp of dark matter, strange matter, dark energy, quarks, etc. Is someone implying that the scientific community agrees on these things? Do you believe that all eight of the people coining these theoretical constructs have been given this information through some miraculous impulse spawned by the one true singularity? (Sounds a little godly, be careful) What about the multiverse, is it expanding relative to our universe? Are you simply following the binary code partitioned in your theoretical being? Great scientists have proposed that we are actually exsisting in a computer simulation so I guess the big bang started with that too familar do-boo-beep sound window makes on start up. I am playing devil's advocate here but I want to point out that asserting that we know the "facts" about our universe or that infallible "proof" exsists in the matter seems just as believable as a creator or intelligent design. Let's not pat ourselves on the back quite yet people. Imo we should proceed with the understanding that we sure as heck don't know everything and science insists humility over arrogance.