I believe you said something about math being a "real" science. My point is that evolution is as fundimental to biology as math is to engineering.
Not all engineers are good at math, and not all need to be. I'm sure some will tell you that math isn't "important" to their jobs. And likewise some biologists may not accept evolution. But like the engineer that thinks that math isn't important, they're wrong.
I'm sure they can do their work by rote drill someone taught them. But they obviously really don't understand their subject.
Thanks for the reply, narby.
I'm a new poster to this thread and wasn't the one to mention math or engineering and such. But, just the same - it is NO DOUBT possible for someone to study and make important contributions to the biological sciences - and not give a rip about evolution or creation - yes?
In these instances, one may have a very mature understanding of their chosen field of study - they just might not understand this evo/crevo thing because it really doesn't affect their lab research or field work or whatever.
I just don't think evolution is all that necessary for the advancement of the sciences.
Most people in any technical field are not theorists. It is possible to manipulate lab equipment that someone eles designed, based on someone else's theories, without "believing" the theory, but no biologist is going to contribute to theory without accepting evolution. There are, of course, countless variations on the mechanism of evolution, and "survival of the fittest" is just a cartoon version of natural selection, but the large thoughts are not in play.