Falsifying a young Universe. (re: Supernova 1987A)

There is a way around the distance thing. All we need to do is have time not exist in deep space as we know time here. That would mean that our base line here, which is based on spacetime points (example: two measures to a star six months apart) does not represent space and time where the star is.

Well, if time did not exist as we know time on earth, obviously it would affect how much time anything takes! If our year of time for example in deep space somewhere represented say, one second of time, then forget using light years as a measurement from here to there!
e don't know. So, unless you do know, you may not claim the things you have been claiming.Edited by starlite, : No reason given.

False. In a time and space where no time existed as we know it here, obviously no time could be required, and if there was any time, it need not equate with time on earth! We don't know. That means that you cannot claim light years.

No speed can exist without time. The speed we know for light on earth and in the solar system represents mass and time existing a certain way here in space. Take away the time and we can forget needing to imagine 'speeding up' or slowing down light!

Overturn? It is honest to point out what is known or not. Have you some theory that has support that says time exists as we know it where the stars are?

Region? How would we know all of space away from earth did not have time as we know it here and in the same degree? The bible talked about the heavens or space being stretched out, I assume that would mean space and time.If something moved without time or with stretched out different time, how would we know here? If there just was not enough 'time' in far space to have a star take a lot of time to move, how would we know? My objection is that you claim to know. Just admit ignorance and be happy.

Relativity does not even address the issue of time does it? It looks at earth time and space and extrapolates, and assumes it applies all over.Bent light does not prove time exists in deep space by the way.

No. Of course GPS does not work where SN1987a is.

Trigonometry involves using (as I already pointed out) time and space on and near earth. The base line for your triangle HAS to be here! You only assume that time as blended with our space represents reality where the star is. Decay is seen here too.

Nope. You don't. That was easy. The evidence you refer to is not able to stand. Not at all. It is religion.

You do not know because you do nothing but sit in your armchair on earth and look.The theories you allude to do not even address whether time exists as we know it there, they all assume and believe. Bad religion. Nothing more.

Not time away from earth where stars are.

Relativity is relative! To earth and our quadrant.

Of course time is involved in a measure from earth where time exists. You kidding?

I mentioned that you actually offered religion, not fact or real knowledge or science. Now if you want to get down and dirty, try to defend something you offered and I may offer an exegesis on it.