I find your snark ironic. My wife was a research biologist for pharmaceutical companies for several years. Yet she soundly rejects the notion of evolution between species. For myself, I think evolution between species probably happened, but I have to admit she knows a heck of a lot more about biochemistry then I do.
Mind you I do not "believe" in evolution like many here seem to do. I am simply convinced it probably happened. If modern variations of the theory could be falsified, and becomes so, it would not bother me in the least.
However it has become overwhelmingly obvious that there are a great many who care deeply about it being true, and cling to it as a necessary component to a larger faith. Moreover some even seem compelled to actively proselytize and even mock unbelievers.
So I find myself arguing with apologists for a philosophy, who's basic premise I am convinced is probably true...how odd is that?
What kind of research does she do? I find it extremely difficult to believe anyone with even an elementary understanding of genetics would "soundly reject evolution".
For example, wouldn't the striking similarity between genomes and cell physiology between say mammals and yeast at least give a skeptic pause for thought? And you are calling us dogmatic?