I’m a computational biochemist, which means that my main job as a scientist is to examine and analyse sequenced DNA. And DNA builds RNA builds protein. And I’m also a doctor, which means teacher, and if there is some sort of call on me to teach about this, it is very much my duty to respond and teach other people how to perform similar analyses. And I just can’t do that effectively if there are people saying “genes don’t undergo mutations, species do not split off, genes don’t duplicate, they don’t then split apart and specialise, and that isn’t driven by adaptive advantages. None if these things fundamental to the analysis actually happen”. No, I have to reserve the right to tell these people to go away, whilst I shall teach how to analyse the genetic sequences.
(Actually that is the bioinformatican’s job, but we won’t split those hairs. I also do bionformatics).

accepting that evolution is a gradual process doesn’t, in any way, preclude the very distinct possibility that there is magic in the process; in the world.

There is genuinely a consensus amongst scientists like myself with a qualified view that Creationism is nonsense. And in my case I have published on what I consider to be weak but real evolutionary force, and since it acts directy on the DNA itself and skews it, there’s just no question that we have a plausible mechanism, But the problem is that left wing, activist groups, attempted to apply the same sort of intolerance to people who were sceptical about global warming that we apply to Creationists. And I’m pretty well up on evolutionary biology, but I couldn’t produce any better a climate model than you or my nurse, and I just don’t have that qualified view in global warming myself. But I do have a bit if cuteness, and I know that it is far too early to treat sceptics as Creationists and try to shut them down. The left wing activist groups demanding massive economic changes just cannot have a case that strong.