That's specious reasoning if ever I saw any. The subjective beliefs of the inventors of techniques are irrelevant - the truth or falsity of the double-helix model of DNA is not affected by nor does it lend credence to Francis Crick's theory that man was deposited on earth by space aliens.
But, to answer your first question, the reason why inflenza vaccines are needed annually are because the influenza virus mutates, and so a different strain arises every year. It's a simple, readily-observable form of evolution we see every year.
Now, whether evolution alone is an adequate mechanism which can explain the diversity of life, or even its very existence, is another question entirely. But that the evolutionary mechanism exists, and that it is a very powerful driving force in the biological world is pretty much undeniable.
What the bacteria are doing isn't so much "evolution" as it is having sexual congress.
But...a flu virus remains a flu virus. It doesn't become, say, a dog. One can raise examples of micro-evolution all they want, it lends no credence to the conclusion that higher life forms rise from lower ones.
What the flu virus is doing isn't so much "evolution" as it is something truly strange since viruses don't have sex.
Good comments. You basically have confirmed the distinction between micro and macro evolution. It is obvious that viruses mutate, dog breeds change over time (both random and selectively), animals go extinct or increase/change based on conditions. Creationists don't deny that.
What creationists do debate evolutionists about is in your last paragraph - was man made specifically and for a higher purpose than animals, is our life here random chance, how did such vast, complex and intricately related environment of earth come to be.
Also, the subjective beliefs of inventors/researchers are relevant. If you believe that the world/the universe operates on an unpredictable basis, you won't try to figure out how a process "works" or a bacterium is put togehter, as you wouldn't expect the design to be consistently replicated. And if you think that humanity was placed here by space aliens, you might be inclined to research the space aliens and what they intended to accomplish.
It also makes a huge difference in the importance you place in the questions you ask, the research you do. Should there be equal resouces extended to understanding of human activity or fighting human disease, ailments, accidental or intentional deaths and that of other species of animals (plants?) Is the life and death of a human of more import than that of a hamster?