This seems more like a cracker jack box science degree holder.
The spread of resisting bacteria is beause the non-resistent ones are dead and thus not around to spread their dna like the resistant dna.
This gobldy gook is basically trying to rehash the "spontaneous generation" pseudo science of the pre evolution era. (see the maggot experiments etc.)
It is "survival of the fittest" not the spontaneous appearance of the fittest.
It's a real degree if this site is to be believed:
http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/people/anderson-k.html
...which doesn't make his science one bit better.
I think that's the whole point of the article. Evolution implies both the spontaneous appearance of beneficial mutations, thus spontaneous appearance of the fitness as well as survival of the fittest.
But we don't see spontaneous appearance of beneficial mutations except when the mutation results in a loss of functionality and that loss of functionality is somehow beneficial as in the case of sickle cell anemia.
Bacterial resistance has been offered as spontaneous appearance of beneficial mutations. But this article examines that and rejects bacterial resistance as being the result of a beneficial mutation except for loss of functionality.
Yep. Two words: Intellectual dishonesty.