Hubble's law is wrong. Why?

Were Hubble's law right, it should, at least, satisfy the following twelve conditions:

1- Giving a concrete proof, not propositional, that all the galaxies began their expanding, translational travel at the same instant.

2- Giving a concrete proof, not propositional, that all the galaxies began their expanding travel from at the same distance from the Earth.

3- Giving a concrete proof, not propositional, that all the galaxies began their expanding, translational travel while they were positioned stationary.

4- To prove that all the galaxies didn’t suffer any stopping whatever its cause.

5- To prove that all galaxies began their cosmological travel while having the same luminosity.

6- To prove that all the galaxies began their travel while having the same density.

7- To prove that there are no blueshift-showing galaxies.

8- To prove that the recent distance of any galaxy is purely a result of recession. In other words, to prove that any galaxy as a whole doesn’t experience any translational motion save the recessional one.

9- To prove that the rate of the expansion of any galaxy is time independent.

10- To prove that the galaxies of equal masses are still at the same distance.

11- To prove that there is no any other shift affecting the Doppler shift.

12- Showing that it could be applied to all the galaxies irrespective of their distance from the Earth.

Anyway, there are no evidence for proving any condition of the twelve. Therefore, Hubble's law is wrong