Look, I really don't want to argue. There are many substances that we do know about that do not need oxygen to burn and not knowing everything there is to know I am relatively certain most, if not all of us have no clue what type of materials there are yet to be discovered that can burn without Oxygen. It's the height of arrogance for these bone headed eggheads to state something as a fact when they don't know their rear ends from a hole in the ground.
Be well!
One must ever be cautious not to make a misstatement.
"There are many substances that we do know about that do not need oxygen to burn and not knowing everything there is to know I am relatively certain most, if not all of us have no clue what type of materials there are yet to be discovered that can burn without Oxygen."
And who can argue with that? -- By any chance, will you be entertaining all week?
You are incorrect, sir. Fires require Oxygen. And I will stop pinging you about it if you are done with the subject.
Nope.
Plants recycle Oxygen, separating it from Carbon Dioxide by utilizing solar energy during photosynthesis.
Oxygen is created in stellar furnaces through thermonuclear fusion. It gets distributed through the galaxy when stars called supernovae explode.
Even if oxygen were to combine chemically with hydrogen or carbon in the sun, it would rapidly disassociate once again because of the extreme heat. The gases in the sun are a plasma, such as may be seen in a welder's electric arc just before you go blind.