C. . .H. . .A. . .SO MUCH DRAIN!

The point is: If you would get stuff down from the sun, you end up with stuff that would count as nuclear/toxic waste if produced on earth. But it would have a OR of 1.

What you'd get from the sun would be Helium, which cools down and stops going into fuzion without the needed gravity and heat O.o

Agreed. I don't think there has ever been a non-singularity interstellar body capable of creating f block/radioactive metals (these are assumed to have been created at the big bang). Besides, our sun is hardly the largest of stars.

Nope. They are assumed to be created by stars.
Our system is a population 1, meaning it is suspected to have been created by the shockwaves of nearby supernovas.
Thats the reason for all the heavyer elements found in our solar system.
If you go down this road you end up with population II stars (very few heavy elements) and the suspected population III stars directly after the big bang (with only traces of heavier Elements created by the big bang)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallicity#Population_II_stars
So stars breed all the elements out of the stuff(Mostly Hydrogen) from the big bang.

Here comes logic into play: Think of the half-life period of uranium 700 million years for uranium-235 period and 4.1 Billion years for uranium-238.
Big Bang was supposed to be 13 billion years ago. So how could there be any uranium-235 on this planet? (if it would only be created in the big bang)

My bad, guess I got my facts screwed up.

13b/700m ~ 18
2^18 ~ 250k

0.0004 % of the original U-235 mass left in the universe (assuming no extra created).

earth is about 4.54b
4.54b/700m ~ 6
2^6 = 64

1.5% of whatever U-235 started out in this planet is left.

There wouldn't be much either way, but I see your point.