You're the one telling me what you do not know. Not me. I dont know what would happen if all the stars that can't be seen form earth were destroyed. You say they are unimportant. I dont know that. If you want to prove your statement and claim feel free and then i will believe it too.

I said that if stars which are expanding away from us at speeds which exceed light suddenly disappeared it would not make a lick of difference to us. I back my point up with the conclusions of Special and General Relativity. Your response?...."well they might effect us in some way we don't know about".....that is simply false because information about their disappearance would never reach us...that is a fact of nature.

No. Im saying i dont know what would happen and i dont think you do either. And you didn't back up anything. All you have made is assertions.


And with you saying the universe needed to be this big to create life on earth, this is kind of pointless. As some stars that cant and have never been seen were important according to your view of needing a big universe to create life on earth.


But why bother, you twisted the bible out of the problem anyway.

I made an assertion of fact. Information doesn't travel thru space faster than the speed of light. The logical conclusion of the fact is that things that happen in regions of space expanding away from us at speeds greater than the speed of light don't make a lick of difference to us now and never will.

Now im not a physicists like you. But how about this.

It would guess that there are trillions of stars that we cant see even with our best telescopes. Now if we blinked them all out of existence your saying they would have no effect on the far away stars we can see? They wouldn't change the obits of any of them and none of them would effect earth in anyway? Hell i would think just bilking out the right one could have unforeseen repercussions.


Galaxies colliding, your view could kill us all.

Some stars that you cannot see now do effect us(or rather will effect us). Suppose there is a star that is 10,000 light years away but fired up it fusion furnance 5000 years ago. We won't see that star's birth for another 5000 years but we will see it. Its not fair to say that all stars which are invisable to us today are inconsequential to us. The stars which are inconsequential to us are the ones which are expanding away from us at speed which exceed light....those are the ones I am referring too.

Now in the senario you presented above none of that information would ever be conveyed to us. We could not detect a change of a star visable to us because a star invisable suddenly disappeared. If we could then information would have to travel faster than light thru space which violates SR.

I'm sure Max will correct me if I am wrong.

And thats my point. Some stars we cat see could be important to us.

Alright i dont matter.

The iron in our blood is made inside of stars that died, along with all kinds of other elements. Seems like another use for stars not mentioned in Genesis.

no wai bro

obv if stars aren't lighting up the cosmos for h0m0 sapiens then they serve no other purposes

Rizeagainst I like you. I like your posts. You are aggressive and people can use this to dismiss you. But i say F them. They need you.
This whole forum is a joke and should be shut down. None of the religious nutters will ever hear anything you say without just dismissing it.
I am now going to leave this part of 2+2 for good, gl with the crazies.

As far as the OP goes, this is an excellent point which intelligent religious people will rationalise away.