I understand that an increased mutation rate of a bacteria under stress can generate increased genetic variation.
I understand that increased genetic variation can increase the chances of the bacteria surviving because some of that variation will produce new proteins that enable the bacteria to better handle the stress.
I understand perfectly!
As far as empiricism. It is am empirical observation that bacteria increase their mutation rate in response to stress. It is an empirical observation that an increased mutation rate within a population will generate increased genetic diversity. It is also an empirical observation that some genetic alleles are better than others at overcoming a particular stress.
Thanks for the understanding! I knew you would eventually come around once you realized that bacteria increase their mutation rate in response to stress in order to increase their chance of survival. :)
Actually, it's not a matter of understanding the mechanics. The mechanics only serve to strengthen the understanding that mutation is constrained. It is a matter of understanding the implications of constrained mutation. This is where we were before you took off on the fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.
Here's what I said, "Evolutionists ignore the fact that genetic variation (and mutation) is constrained. Mostly because they don't understand the implications."
We were trying to get you to understand the implications of constrained mutation. It does not support 'goo-to-you' evolution but instead supports a created, adaptive biology where limits to genetic change are observed.
Do you understand?