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.
"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."Ok, you have me there. Of course you had to change frames of reference to do it. But indeed, there are a lot of YEC who believe that multple frames of reference could explain how stars were created on the fourth day yet appear to be very old at least from a starlight distance calculation.
Therefore, I concede that I have no way of knowing if the original author who clearly believes in evolution of galaxies, believes in biological evolution. And therefore labeling him an "evolutionist" is misleading, as I agree that the term "evolutionist" is commonly related to biological and not stellar evolution.