What does evolution have to do with biology and genetics
Everything that makes biology and genetics a science and not just stamp collecting. “Teaching biology without evolution would be like teaching chemistry without the periodic table of the elements.” “Evolutionary theory is the framework tying together all of biology. It explains similarities and differences between organisms, fossils, biogeography, drug resistance, extreme features such as the peacock's tail, relative virulence of parasites, and much more besides.”
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA042.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA215.html
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/10/2/text_pop/l_102_01.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/modern-synthesis.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
when evolution is only theoretical?
The history of biological evolution of populations is a fact. This natural history includes these factual observations “Life appeared on earth more than two billion years ago; Life forms have changed and diversified over life's history; Species are related via common descent from one or a few common ancestors; Natural selection is a significant factor affecting how species change.”
The basic mechanism of the theory evolution was a hypothesis that has survived all tests. “If "only a theory" were a real objection, creationists would also be issuing disclaimers complaining about the theory of gravity, atomic theory, the germ theory of disease, and the theory of limits (on which calculus is based). The theory of evolution is no less valid than any of these.” “The evidence is extensive and consistent, and it points unambiguously to evolution, including common descent, change over time, and adaptation influenced by natural selection. It would be preposterous to refer to these as anything other than facts. ” The modern synthesis is close to a mathematical theorem of biochemistry: DNA + PHYSICAL REPLICATION MECHANISMS + TIME = EVOLUTION. The success of evolutionary algorithms is a theorem.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA201.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA202.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Or are we discussing theoretical biology and genetics?
We could, if you have the intellectual chops for it. So far we've seen a distinct failure to engage on your part such that people have misappropriated your thread. Here's some pages about fairly unrealistic models of genetics where the idea of evolution can be tested in seconds rather than centuries.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/genalg/genalg.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/fitness/
By the way, the amount of intelligence and education a person has does not make him/her a better person.
That just seems a snobbish and bizzare red herring. The term "better" has no inherit meaning. In science, we assume that "better" means more capable of predicting behavior of phenomena that actually happen. So intelligence and education is certainly no handicap, especially when there are reliable, communicable, precise frameworks for predicting the observations of phenomena. “Opinions have value to the extent that they are informed. If you are suffering serious stomach problems, would you give equal weight to opinions from a professional gastroenterologist and a supermarket bag-boy? When someone speaking on the subject of evolution is woefully uninformed on issues concerning evolution, it is entirely appropriate to point that out.”
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA012.html
The information could be invalid and their intelligence make them better liars.
So what is needed is a way to tell truth from lies. Methodological empiricism suggests we test the claims made, because even a good person could repeat lies and even a bad person might have good cause to tell the truth. “Intellectual honesty demands that evidence be followed whether we like the conclusion or not.”
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH010_1.html
Your failure to engage suggests you are a mere propagandist and not a thinker. Care to comment?