Is evolution a debated topic in the veterinary field?

[Thought Hammer]

I am an undergrad pre-vet and I'm a bit ignorant on the veterinary community (hardly any substantial experience). I volunteer at monthly/weekly clinics for ferrals and specific groups who need medical care. I was discussing with a doctor at one of the clinics when I mentioned how the anatomy and physiology of animals evolved to be so complex. I found out the doctor followed a religious faith and did not believe in evolution which baffled me.

I was under the assumption that a significant portion of the medical field would adhere to Darwinism since I considered medicine a part of the scientific community.

Maybe I sounded too blunt but I wanted to gauge how appropriate I should be when approaching this topic. Like the title states, is evolution a debatable topic in the veterinary field?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dyachei]

I am an undergrad pre-vet and I'm a bit ignorant on the veterinary community (hardly any substantial experience). I volunteer at monthly/weekly clinics for ferrals and specific groups who need medical care. I was discussing with a doctor at one of the clinics when I mentioned how the anatomy and physiology of animals evolved to be so complex. I found out the doctor followed a religious faith and did not believe in evolution which baffled me.

I was under the assumption that a significant portion of the medical field would adhere to Darwinism since I considered medicine a part of the scientific community.

Maybe I sounded too blunt but I wanted to gauge how appropriate I should be when approaching this topic. Like the title states, is evolution a debatable topic in the veterinary field?

There were definitely people in my class that didn't believe in evolution. I personally find it hard to resolve many topics and ideas without some belief in evolution. Microbiology (to me) shows evolution on a daily basis. A girl in my class explained that she believed in evolution at microscopic levels for microscopic life but not for complex beings like humans.

 

[RackingHorse]

I am a pre-vet student. I do not believe in macroscopic evolution. However, I do believe in genetic changes in populations and adaptations but I do not believe a species can change from one species to the next. My posting is not meant to start a debate. But, I can already see that this thread is headed for a huge debate. Also, I know of several veterinarians that are NOT darwinists as well as medical doctors.

 

[Minnerbelle]

I think most veterinarians believe in evolution, but there are definitely a subset of people who don't to varying degrees. And just as dyachei and rackinghorse said above, I think a lot of the differences in belief happen at the macroevolution level. I highly doubt that any of these people will argue that antibiotic resistance doesn't exist, or that different strains of viruses never pop up. I would be a little concerned if a medical/veterinary doctor didn't believe in that type of thing, but it doesn't bother me all too much if they believe that the human race came to be as the bible says. As long as their medical decisions aren't swayed by it (and there's no reason why it should), I don't think it really matters whether they believe people evolved from hairier ancestors.

 

[Cypress]

I think anyone with advanced education will be willing to at least acknowledge that evolution is widely accepted whether they believe in it on a religious basis or not. I myself believe in evolution and have found that my willingness to discuss the subject changes depending on the person I am speaking with. I do not feel the need to hide my beliefs (especially since they are scientific based and have nothing to do with religion) but have also found that sometimes its just not worth the effort to discuss it - it can be a very hot topic button for some people. I don't touch religious debates with a 10 foot pole - to each his own is my motto.

You would be surprised though how willing people are to discuss it even if they disagree with you. My husband worked part time in a children's museum in the dinosaur exhibit - he ran into a number of people with very strong religious beliefs (often in home school groups visiting the museum) that were willing to talk with him about evolution and agree to disagree on the subject.

I wouldn't shy away from it - I would just tread lightly as you learn more about those you work and volunteer with and fellow students. Respect is the best approach to any hot topic - if you show respect for someone else's beliefs the hope would be they will afford you the same level of respect.

 

[breenie]

Unfortunately.

A classmate told me, "I dunno, I just don't think people came from monkeys. There just like, isn't any evidence for evolution, really." I'm pretty offended by the lack of eloquence and usage of "monkeys" when you mean non-human primates. Come on, you're in vet school, use the right words.

Another classmate said her old boss didn't believe in dinosaurs.

 

[pooter]

Meh. If they can still learn the anatomy and physiology it probably won't affect the average practitioner too much. I will say, though, that certain concepts like a cranial nerve that innervates a shoulder muscle are easier to grasp if you accept the theory. There's a reason Penn employs both a paleontologist and an evolutionary biologist as anatomy professors. I'd imagine it would be harder to get into a very research-oriented specialty, like a DVM-PhD program, if you reject evolution. And, obviously academic papers are peer-reviewed. But, it's not like adcoms bring it up in the average interview.

tl;dr on my personal beliefs (feel free to skip):

Personally, I'm very religious, but I have no problem accepting evolution as a description of how the world developed and continues to develop. I guess that's because, for me, science has always been about *how* things work, not *why* they work. I realize that's not everyone's interpretation. For example, I have an ex whom I'll call X who self-identifies as an atheist and is currently in a bio PhD program. When we took classes together in undergrad, we could see the same process or structure. My reaction would be "Wow, He made this out of that? God's awesome!" while X's reaction was "Wow, random chance made this out of that? The universe is awesome!" We learned the same thing and had almost the same reaction, but interpreted that reaction differently. Some might classify my belief as "Intelligent Design." I don't because it's a matter of faith for me--not science--and I don't agree with blurring the line between the two. So, I'm just a person who both accepts evolution and believes in an omnipotent God.

 

[Alhazred]

while X's reaction was "Wow, random chance made this out of that? The universe is awesome!"

I am going to stay out of this thread except to post ಠ_ಠ every time someone refers to evolution as "random chance."

So without further ado, ಠ_ಠ.

 

[New Foundland]

 

[chickenlittle]

Personally, I'm very religious, but I have no problem accepting evolution as a description of how the world developed and continues to develop. I guess that's because, for me, science has always been about *how* things work, not *why* they work. .... My reaction would be "Wow, He made this out of that? God's awesome!" .

Ditto.

My husband, who has a BS in Biology and is now in seminary, likes to say "all religion tells us is that God made it... science tells us HOW he made it!"

 

[breenie]

I was gonna save this for if this got heated, but looks like everyone is playing nice... so...

 

[Whyevernot55]

Relevant commentary: Personally, I don't think I've met any pre-vets or other scientists that do not believe in evolution, but I'm sure that will change. Although my old boss insists that Santa is real.
Personal beliefs: UU FTW. Anyone who knows what I'm talking about wins a cookie.

 

[PppermintTwist]

I am a pre-vet student. I do not believe in macroscopic evolution. However, I do believe in genetic changes in populations and adaptations but I do not believe a species can change from one species to the next. My posting is not meant to start a debate. But, I can already see that this thread is headed for a huge debate. Also, I know of several veterinarians that are darwinists as well as medical doctors.

I agree

 

[PppermintTwist]

Relevant commentary: Personally, I don't think I've met any pre-vets or other scientists that do not believe in evolution, but I'm sure that will change. Although my old boss insists that Santa is real.
Personal beliefs: UU FTW. Anyone who knows what I'm talking about wins a cookie.

ummm.... Unitarian Universalist For The Win? Do I get half a cookie for partial credit?

 

[yann]

I think most veterinarians believe in evolution, but there are definitely a subset of people who don't to varying degrees. And just as dyachei and rackinghorse said above, I think a lot of the differences in belief happen at the macroevolution level. I highly doubt that any of these people will argue that antibiotic resistance doesn't exist, or that different strains of viruses never pop up. I would be a little concerned if a medical/veterinary doctor didn't believe in that type of thing, but it doesn't bother me all too much if they believe that the human race came to be as the bible says. As long as their medical decisions aren't swayed by it (and there's no reason why it should), I don't think it really matters whether they believe people evolved from hairier ancestors.

Agree completely. Just don't preach me whatever your personal belief may be, and as long as it doesn't affect your professional obligation as veterinarian (examples mentioned already by Minnerbelle), don't see why it matters.

We all have the right to believe whatever. If you think the earth is flat and Aliens are secretly planning to probe us, go right ahead Just don't tell others what to believr or not to believe. That's usually where most conflicts come from.

 

[philomycus]

I still don't understand how someone can say evolution is not true, but then go try to to figure out which antibiotic will still work, b/c the rest of them the bugs have grown resistant to.... ummmmm....duh

 

[breenie]

I still don't understand how someone can say evolution is not true, but then go try to to figure out which antibiotic will still work, b/c the rest of them the bugs have grown resistant to.... ummmmm....duh

The usual argument is that microbes can evolve to antibiotics, but people didn't evolve from monkeys.

Doesn't seem like a legit distinction to me, but that's what people stand by.

 

[Dsmoody23]

I'll take the plunge.

If you don't believe in evolution and you're receiving a scientific education in the developed world, you need to study harder. The morphological and cellular similarities from single celled plants right through humans are available to anyone with access to an intro. to zoology textbook.

I never quite understood how God could be responsible for the laws of physics, chemistry and every other scientific discipline, but not evolution. Why don't you guys just fold it all together? Evolutionary complexity is a pretty compelling argument for intelligent design.

Remember when it was religious dogma to believe that the sun revolved around our flat planet? That's the level of seriousness that this debate will be treated with in 100 years.

 

[New Foundland]

I am a pre-vet student. I do not believe in macroscopic evolution. However, I do believe in genetic changes in populations and adaptations but I do not believe a species can change from one species to the next. My posting is not meant to start a debate. But, I can already see that this thread is headed for a huge debate. Also, I know of several veterinarians that are darwinists as well as medical doctors.

i wish i could believe things despite overwhelming evidence...
what a luxurious mind you must reside in

 

[RackingHorse]

I am a pre-vet student. I do not believe in macroscopic evolution. However, I do believe in genetic changes in populations and adaptations but I do not believe a species can change from one species to the next. My posting is not meant to start a debate. But, I can already see that this thread is headed for a huge debate. Also, I know of several veterinarians that are NOT darwinists as well as medical doctors.

Also, there are physicists, chemists, biologists and mathematicians who do not believe in evolution. The reason evolution is an excepted view is because it is the only theory about origins taught in publics institutions. There are several books and documentaries by credible scientists who do not believe in evolution or the big bang.

 

[breenie]

The reason evolution is an excepted view is because it is the only theory about origins taught in publics institutions.

Did you maybe want to reword this? It sounds like you're implying that evolution is total crap and is just an agenda pushed by school systems... I might be a little reactionary on that, but just want to clarify.

 

[RackingHorse]

Did you maybe want to reword this? It sounds like you're implying that evolution is total crap and is just an agenda pushed by school systems... I might be a little reactionary on that, but just want to clarify.

Basically that is what I am saying.

 

[fromthebox]

I'm actually kinda proud of this thread for making it this far without too much vitriol. I'm with Minnerbelle and others. If it doesn't affect your ability to practice fully, then I don't think it is an issue worth making a fuss about. I am agnostic, and not above believing there was intelligent design. The personal attacks I faced as a child when I told the other kids I "wasn't sure god existed" were enough to keep me the heck out of any religious discussions for years. So yeah, believe what you want to, just don't excoriate others for their beliefs. It's rude, it's divisive and largely unnecessary to your education that they believe as you do.

ETA: guess I missed the recent posts. For the record, all things taught in school are part of an agenda, regardless of whether they agree with your beliefs. he agenda is developed to decide what we teach, and I have a hard time believing that the limited amount of evolution you get in secondary school is that much of a brainwashing.

 

[breenie]

Basically that is what I am saying.

Well. Alrighty then.

 

[Bismarck]

I'll take the plunge.

If you don't believe in evolution and you're receiving a scientific education in the developed world, you need to study harder. The morphological and cellular similarities from single celled plants right through humans are available to anyone with access to an intro. to zoology textbook.

I never quite understood how God could be responsible for the laws of physics, chemistry and every other scientific discipline, but not evolution. Why don't you guys just fold it all together? Evolutionary complexity is a pretty compelling argument for intelligent design.

Remember when it was religious dogma to believe that the sun revolved around our flat planet? That's the level of seriousness that this debate will be treated with in 100 years.

Please kindly append my name to your Newsletter's distribution list.

I couldn't have said it any differently (or better.)

 

[New Foundland]

Also, there are physicists, chemists, biologists and mathematicians who do not believe in evolution. The reason evolution is an excepted view is because it is the only theory about origins taught in publics institutions. There are several books and documentaries by credible scientists who do not believe in evolution or the big bang.

grammar aside, are you suggesting that the mere presence of a minority of biblical literalist scientists is in itself evidence against evolution?

x scientists are critical of theory Y, and x>0

^^^ that is what you are trying to use to convince us that theory Y is "unsubstantiated" or "questionable" ??


I can't ever imagine why people avoid threads like these. These threads are beautiful lessons in the psychology of belief

 

[RackingHorse]

grammar aside, are you suggesting that the mere presence of a minority of biblical literalist scientists is in itself evidence against evolution?

x scientists are critical of theory Y, and x>0

^^^ that is what you are trying to use to convince us that theory Y is "unsubstantiated" or "questionable" ??


I can't ever imagine why people avoid threads like these. These threads are beautiful lessons in the psychology of belief

And you're posts are beautiful lessons in the psychology of unbelief. I am not suggesting anything. The person who made this thread asked if evolution is a debated topic in veterinary medicine. So, I answered their question.

 

[pooter]

I am going to stay out of this thread except to post ಠ_ಠ every time someone refers to evolution as "random chance."

So without further ado, ಠ_ಠ.

Bad paraphrasing on my part.

(must . . . not . . . follow . . . this . . . thread . . . must . . . study . . . now . . .*sigh*)

 

[Dsmoody23]

Also, there are physicists, chemists, biologists and mathematicians who do not believe in evolution. The reason evolution is an excepted view is because it is the only theory about origins taught in publics institutions. There are several books and documentaries by credible scientists who do not believe in evolution or the big bang.

Several books by (un-named) 'credible' scientists.

Vs.

The sum total of peer-reviewed, exhaustively tested and endlessly scrutinized scientific knowledge from the global academic community over the last 150+ years.

Seriously?

 

[RackingHorse]

Several books by (un-named) 'credible' scientists.

Vs.

The sum total of peer-reviewed, exhaustively tested and endlessly scrutinized scientific knowledge from the global academic community over the last 150+ years.

Seriously?

See my response to Newfoundland.

 

[breenie]

See my response to Newfoundland.

That doesn't address Dsmoody's question.

Also a few people have pointed out that believing in evolution and believing in a world created by God do not have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[RackingHorse]

In order to believe in the God of the Bible you must believe that He created it in 7 literal days. Evolution is incompatible with The Bible, and is a tool of Satan.

 

[Dsmoody23]

And you're posts are beautiful lessons in the psychology of unbelief. I am not suggesting anything. The person who made this thread asked if evolution is a debated topic in veterinary medicine. So, I answered their question.

This one?

It's true that you're not suggesting anything. You said it outright.

If you post an assertion that the science of evolution is state-sponsored brainwashing and use 'several books' as your only evidence, expect some pushback.

I'm not one of the folks who espouse a 'live and let live' mentality when it comes to this subject. The simple fact that you have a viewpoint doesn't make it equally valid in the absence of any evidence. As a community of professional and aspiring scientists, we need to treat creationism exactly like the ignorant, outdated and intellectually dangerous viewpoint that it is.

 

[breenie]

In order to believe in the God of the Bible you must believe that He created it in 7 literal days. Evolution is incompatible with The Bible, and is a tool of Satan.

Where do dinosaurs fit into your world view? (serious question, not rhetorical snark)

 

[RackingHorse]

The science of evolution? Give me a break there are so many documented cases of refutation regarding tenants of evolution, that it is ridiculous(And, I know the next comment is going to be for me to cite sources. But, everyone knows how to work google and can research it for themselves.) . The only reason people believe in this junk is they want to live however they want to live and not be held accountable for it. As our society has become more atheistic in thinking so have the laws governing it. To believe that life ascended from organic compounds in a cesspool somewhere on this earth is preposterous. The time it would take for such a thing to occur would be much longer than is what is assumed.

 

[RackingHorse]

The Bible mentions Dinosaurs in pretty good detail. I can give u references to these if you would like. Also, I believe in what is called the gap theory (not the one that supports evolution.) I believe that there was a previous earth before the one that we live on now. I also have scripture to back that up.

 

[Dsmoody23]

In order to believe in the God of the Bible you must believe that He created it in 7 literal days. Evolution is incompatible with The Bible, and is a tool of Satan.

 

[breenie]

The Bible mentions Dinosaurs in pretty good detail. I can give u references to these if you would like. Also, I believe in what is called the gap theory (not the one that supports evolution.) I believe that there was a previous earth before the one that we live on now. I also have scripture to back that up.

Yeah... I'd like both of those.

 

[New Foundland]

guys remember when Satan got a mention?

I liked that part

 

[RackingHorse]

Yeah... I'd like both of those.

Is it ok if I pm u those?

 

[breenie]

Is it ok if I pm u those?

Sure.

 

[Dsmoody23]

Is it ok if I pm u those?

How about you post them, instead?

A nice link to anything peer-reviewed and published that supports your argument would be rad too.

 

[RackingHorse]

"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called........"
I Timothy 6:20

 

[breenie]

Alrighty. I think we're done here. Question has been answered, dinosaurs have been explained, and everyone is thoroughly riled.

What a success!

 

[bbeventer]

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_BzWUuZN5w[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLr5vl-n0Bo&feature=fvst[/YOUTUBE]

 

[sunnex3]

oy vey...there is a reason why i don't discuss religion/evolution as i am both a) religious and b) a believer in evolution.

this thread makes my head hurt!

and really, i feel like we've already done this:

 

[Dsmoody23]

 

[StartingoverVet]

Dr. Dodson, the paleontologist who teaches anatomy at Penn Vet, is on wikipedia with the following:

Describing himself as a "deeply committed Christian,"[3] Dodson subscribes to theistic evolution and has argued that there is no real conflict between religion and science, writing that: "I have found little if anything to support or necessitate the warlike antagonism between science and religion pictured by Dawkins and like-minded scientists, who are animated by motives other than pure, disinterested science."[3] Dodson has written numerous essays on the topic of religious belief and science, and currently serves on the Board of Directors for the nonprofit Philadelphia-based Metanexus Institute on Science and Religion.

See. You can have your religion and evolve too!

 

[sunnex3]

and just to be cliche i'm going to quote einstein: "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind."

 

[HopefulAg]

Just to continue this because I think it's entertaining and it's better than studying:

In order to believe in the God of the Bible you must believe that He created it in 7 literal days. Evolution is incompatible with The Bible, and is a tool of Satan.

So you believe in the bible literally? You don't subscribe to all the word twisting of defining a 'day' as billions of years? Well at least you're honest about it, which is more than you can say for the apologists.

The science of evolution? Give me a break there are so many documented cases of refutation regarding tenants of evolution, that it is ridiculous(And, I know the next comment is going to be for me to cite sources. But, everyone knows how to work google and can research it for themselves.) .

Well that is how a discussion works. Those making the positive claim have to provide proof for such a claim.

guys remember when Satan got a mention?

I liked that part

Word. "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist." is all fun and games, but I prefer "the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing Christians that he's God." For the ultimate liar, I don't think that'd be hard.


Anyhow, I really cannot comprehend how people can claim they believe in microevolution, but not 'macroevolution' (even though there's no difference between them). 'Macro' evolution is just a summation of 'micro' evolution.

I think it's because providing clear cut evidence for microevolution is simple, such as with antibiotic resistance, so it can't really be dismissed because it's obvious, blatantly so, even to those without much scientific knowledge. The so-called 'macro' evolution takes a wee bit more thought and can't be directly observed (as in a living creature) so they disregard that, which I think is ironic for a population that bases their entire existence on something they can't directly observe.