Which theory better explains the origin of the universe: the Big Bang Theory or the Steady State Theory?

Perhaps the best theory that explains the origins of the universe has not been imagined and stated yet. Between the Big Bang Theory and the Steady State Theory, the scientific community is fairly certain that a steady state universe is incorrect. Steady State ideas began to die out around the 1950's, when radio telescope astronomers began to compile data about distant galaxies. Steady State Theory assumes that distant parts of the universe should look the same as nearer parts of the universe. In the 1960's Martin Ryle showed off an impressive amount of data that showed a greater density of radio sources far away from Earth. This organization is something predicted by the Big Bang Theory, but it would not be true according to the Steady State Theory. Further support of a universe created through a big bang comes from quasars (which are really far away and brighter than entire galaxies). Using laws established by Edwin Hubble, astronomers have been able to verify that quasars were much more common in the past than they are at present. That evidence basically cements the idea that the universe is changing, evolving, and very different now than it used to be. That concept is something that would happen in a universe created through a big bang, but it is not something that would happen in a steady state universe. I believe that the Big Bang Theory is a better theory than the Steady State Theory.  
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/brilliant-blunders/