[DannyTN]

"he'll deepen his knowledge of genetics and be better able to cure disease."

I wouldn't mind as much evolution being a part of the supplementation for a medical degree or part of a genetics degree. But a degree in evolution? Sorry, that just seems like a waste of taxpayers money.

I'm not convinced that evolution adds anything to the study of genetics or medicine. In my opinion, evolution has done more harm than good in those fields. And it was afterall, the creationist, George Mendel, who discovered genetics.

[js1138]

Are scientific discoveries validated by the religion of their discoverer?

[Virginia-American]

I'm not convinced that evolution adds anything to the study of genetics or medicine.

Surely you've seen this example before:

If a genetic marker (like an ERV or a pseudogene) is found in the same location in the genomes of both a cow and a pig, but is not present in a horse, put these species and genera of animal into class
a) will have the marker,
b) won't have it,
c) not enough data to tell.

aardvark, bear, camel, deer, elephant, fox, giraffe, hippo, llama, panda, person, platypus, rat, rhino, whale, zebra.

The question can be answered, but only by using the common descent part of the Theory of Evolution. None of the factions of anti-evolution activism, neither Christian, Islamic, or Hindu creationism, nor ID (except for Behe's version), has the power to answer this question.

(BTW, when the answers are checked against reality, they're right)

Therefore, your claim that evolution does not add to the study of genetics is false.

As for medicine, ...