First, I want to commend you for Reply #3636, it had the attribute of being thoughtful, helpful and appropriate.
I thought I should respond to this quote as a biochemist:
I disagree that biochemists are equally qualified to discuss evolution as biologists because their field of study is the chemical reactions within organisms. They can talk about the role that formaldehyde plays in human metabolism, for example, but not very much about the evolution of feathers, for example. And of course, not all biologists are equally qualified. I would give more credence to an evolutionary biologist than a cellular biologist if I had a question about evolution. I experience this issue in my life as well - when people hear I am a lawyer, they do not hesitate to ask me questions about child support or automobile accidents when I have no idea about any of that stuff. I do business law.
But, I digress. I am still waiting for a theology text by biologists.
You are correct, in that there is a large swath of biochemists that deal with metabolism who discover and analyze therapeutic inhibitors of enzyme functions that relate to an assortment of metabolic diseases. You would probably also be correct that a large fraction of these people would not be that knowledgeable about evolution.
That being said, there is also a large swath of biochemists that are more knowledgeable about evolution than evolutionary biologists. Most biochemists are not in a biochemistry department, they are spread out in other departments, some of which one would think has little to do with biochemistry (especially at medical schools and NIH). For example I am in the molecular biology division of a biology department, molecular biology used to be the realm of biophysicists, but got taken over by molecular geneticists (biochemists). Quitting here so as to not belabor the point since I can see where you are coming from.