Not bigoted in the least. One can speak as a scientist, limiting oneself to that field. One can speak as a religious apologist, limiting oneself to theological matters. But when one attempts to combine the two, interjecting theological conclusions that the data does not support, one steps away from the basic principles of science: "... test ideas by experiment and observation; build on those ideas that pass the test; reject the ones that fail; follow the evidence wherever it leads; and question everything." - Neil deGrasse Tyson in the first episode of "Cosmos." Pointing out that a scientist has departed from that standard is accurate, not bigoted.<quoted text>
It is bigoted to discredit someone because she "speak(s) as a scientist and as a religious apologist. Especially in the context of addressing an audience including both.
You also ignore the fact that the Big Bang has been significantly affirmed as a theory.
What you should be pondering is how an ancient book beat scientists to that by about 5,000 years.
I've acknowledged that the community of astrophysicists has confirmed the Big Bang theory for many years. I may ignore some things, but not that. As to your ancient book, it did not beat the scientists at all. It simply told a story, one so vague in terms of science that any one of a thousand conclusion could have been made to fit. Only your powerful need to validate your book in any way possible prevents you from seeing that for yourself.