There are many theories that people have postulated. For the most part, they are on the fringes because they introduce more problems than they solve. Proposals for a non-singularity at the beginning of the universe are not fringe theories. They are given serious consideration because they seem capable of explaining a large number of currently unanswered questions. Even people who think the universe may have started as a singularity admit that they don't have the mathematical tools to describe a universe starting that way.

If you care to brush up on m-brane theory, you will discover that mainstream physics is perfectly comfortable with "big bangs" that don't
start from a singularity.

Now anyone can google anything to come up with articles on the Internet supporting their position. However there are no observations that require a rotating universe. And certainly no mainstream physicists who demand it. Indeed, as I said earlier, the physics of relativity allow for a rotating universe and even for a stationary earth. That is the nature of relativity. All motion is relative, even the universe's.

There's just no point in complicating the mathematics by having the universe move and me stand still when calculating my fuel consumption on a trip to the grocery store.