I am the LORD that maketh all things;
that stretcheth forth the heavens alone;
that spreadeth abroad the earth by Myself;
That frustrateth the tokens of the liars,
and maketh diviners mad;
that turneth wise men backward,
and maketh their knowledge foolish;
Isaiah 44:24,25
"Luminosity and angular diameter data from both the HST and the JWST are consistent with the Doppler model in which galaxy redshifts are produced entirely from the Doppler effect due to motion through a non-expanding space and in which no galaxy evolution has occurred.
However, there is degeneracy between cosmological tests and galaxy evolution.
Q: How do we really know that galaxies at high redshifts are anything like nearby galaxies? 
The data above could also be interpreted as being consistent with the ΛCDM model if galaxies at high redshift are actually 5–10 smaller than nearby galaxies and approximately one magnitude intrinsically fainter.
Using the standard Einstein synchrony convention (ESC), we are seeing distant galaxies not as they are today, but as they were billions of years ago when the light left.
Q: Could galaxy evolution over deep time explain the angular diameter and luminosity trends in a ΛCDM model?
A: There are several reasons to reject such an explanation.
A: There are several reasons to reject such an explanation.
First, theoretical studies of galaxy formation under the assumptions of the standard model did not predict such a size growth without substantial mass growth. Rather, it was the mass of such galaxies that was supposed to increase with time; yet these high redshift galaxies already have high mass (estimated from their luminosity). So, there are theoretical problems with such a claim.
Second, and more importantly, even if we grant that galaxies somehow grow in diameter with time, should we expect that such growth curves would precisely match what the Doppler model predicts without such growth? It is not simply that the observed angular diameters match the Doppler model predictions at high z.
Second, and more importantly, even if we grant that galaxies somehow grow in diameter with time, should we expect that such growth curves would precisely match what the Doppler model predicts without such growth? It is not simply that the observed angular diameters match the Doppler model predictions at high z.
--Rather, they appear to match at all values of z. Should we expect that galaxies grow in size and in brightness in exactly such a way as to eliminate any evidence of the FLRW metric in favor of simple Doppler shifts? Only by rejecting parsimony could we entertain such a possibility.
Third, there are several observable characteristics of galaxies that are relatively independent of the cause of their redshifts.
Astronomers have already noted that the metallicity range in high-redshift JWST surveys is comparable to nearby galaxies—suggesting no strong evolution (Rhoads et al. 2023).
Moreover, the structures of such galaxies are mature, with many disk galaxies (Ferreira et al. 2022).
There is even evidence of high redshift barred spirals which were previously thought to be a much more recent (nearby) phenomenon (Costantin et al. 2023). 
--The ratios of spiral galaxies to ellipticals or to irregulars is approximately constant out to a redshift of 10 suggesting little, if any, evolution (Lee at al. 2023).
Beyond a redshift of 10, the ratio of spiral galaxies to ellipticals appears to drop somewhat, but this may be due to selection effects; typical galaxies at such distances have an average angular diameter of around 0.2 arcseconds and are faint, making morphology classification difficult.
In all tests that are relatively independent of cosmological assumptions, high redshift galaxies appear to be very similar to local galaxies. This suggests that no significant evolution has occurred."
AIG