[DannyTN]

"Stellar evolution might be better called stellar aging."

It might be a better term but the same people who buy long ages and evolution for the earth buy long ages and evolution for the universe. So I'm not wrong in calling them evolutionists. In fact, I'd dare say that the number of poeple who believe in a long age for the Universe and stellar evolution, but a short age for the earth, is relatively small.

[Seamoth]

Er, that's the official position of a lot of YEC scientists... the most popular explanation for stellar evolution involves multiple frames of reference, billions of years for the stars and Genesis happens to use the 6,000 year old Earth's frame of reference. Russell Humphreys probably has the strongest following.

[RightWhale]

We are probably stuck with the multi-definitional use of the term forever. What we ought to do in such usage is limit the definition in each particular field of study, but many or most won't, which opens the possibility of metaevolution as a study of evolution of evolution.