Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolutionists Couldn’t Have Been More Wrong About Antibiotic Resistance
Proslogion ^ | Dec. 15, 2016 | Dr. Jay Wile

Posted on 12/16/2016 2:27:06 PM PST by fishtank

Evolutionists Couldn’t Have Been More Wrong About Antibiotic Resistance

Dec. 15, 2016

A colony of bacteria similar to the one analyzed in the study being discussed. (click for credit) A colony of bacteria similar to the one analyzed in the study being discussed. (click for credit) Back when I went to university, I was taught (as definitive fact) that bacteria evolved resistance to antibiotics as a result of the production of antibiotics. This was, of course, undeniable evidence for the fact that new genes can arise through a process of mutation and natural selection. Like most evolution-inspired ideas, however, the more we learned about antibiotic resistance in bacteria, the more we learned that there was a problem.

(Excerpt) Read more at blog.drwile.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: antibiotics
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-225 next last
To: discostu

I didn’t ask if everybody is accountable. I asked if you were accountable. If you had any real confidence in your statements, then you would freely answer the question.

To switch like you did from the focus on you to referencing “everybody” is a known tactic of the left. But what the left typically doesn’t understand is the larger picture. To use Alinsky as an example: his founding principle of dishonesty before anything forces its followers to constantly be covering their tracks and avoiding real discussion.

Meanwhile, your scare tactics about antibiotic and other kinds of resistance are utter nonsense.


121 posted on 12/18/2016 9:24:54 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

I’ve answered the question freely. I’ve even mostly ignored the fact that it’s a stupid question. Meanwhile you have contributed nothing to the discussion other than pointless fallacies and the declaration you are unconvinced. I’d love to engage in real discussion, but you’re not offering any, asking if someone is willing to be accountable isn’t a reasonable discussion, it’s not even an unreasonable discussion.. It’s a pointless, stupid question that has nothing to do with any topic ever.

It’s not scare tactics. It’s reality. For it to be scare tactics there’d have to be a an “or else”. There is no “or else” there is NOTHING we can do about it. Bacteria ARE evolving, antibiotic resistant strains ARE taking over, that’s just how it is. It’s like the sun rising in the east, it’s an inevitable part of life. You either admit it, or you don’t, but you can’t change it.


122 posted on 12/18/2016 9:33:57 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: discostu

Are you claiming that if you don’t believe in evolution then you must believe the stars “revolve around the earth?”


123 posted on 12/18/2016 9:36:19 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

I’m pointing out that there’s a long and sad history of people treating the Bible as a science text and being very very wrong and going to great lengths to pretend they’re right. If you don’t believe in evolution you might might as well believe the stars revolve around a flat earth, because you’ve relegated yourself to the pile of deliberately ignorant useless people, might as well go all in.


124 posted on 12/18/2016 9:39:23 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: discostu

I asked for the purpose of further clarifying your general ideology for the purpose of context, knowing that leftists don’t believe in accountability.


125 posted on 12/18/2016 9:40:39 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: discostu

A strong argument can be stated in concise (meaning few words) form by clear thinkers who understand the concept well.

Please tell me in a concise way what is the strongest evidence for evolution.


126 posted on 12/18/2016 9:43:20 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Ideology doesn’t have anything to do with facts. I’m discussing FACTS.


127 posted on 12/18/2016 9:45:31 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

DNA. Fossils. Mendel.


128 posted on 12/18/2016 9:46:37 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: discostu
Evidence for evolution of new species is clearly observable in nature. Antibiotic resistance is just one of many examples.

But...Macro evolution is a different matter entirely.

Please explain how it is possible for evolution of the clotting of blood. Missing even one step in the biochemical cascade is fatal so gradual evolution does not explain this. And...No, I am NOT looking for a, “ God did it.” explanation. The scientific method isn't about a reliance on a supernatural being.

Please, Lay out the evidence. If the evidence doesn't fit then another must be explored.

129 posted on 12/18/2016 9:51:32 AM PST by wintertime (tStop treating government teachers like they are reincarnated Mother Teresas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: discostu

What about the clotting of blood. How did that evolve?


130 posted on 12/18/2016 9:52:14 AM PST by wintertime (tStop treating government teachers like they are reincarnated Mother Teresas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/DI/clot/Clotting.html

Knock yourself out.


131 posted on 12/18/2016 9:57:08 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: discostu
Thank you for the reference.

It wasn't much of a “knock out” since I have had the chemistry, organic chemistry, biochemistry, and genetics courses ( both on the undergrad and grad school level) to fully understand the article.

However...the author states:

“Now, it would not be fair, just because we have presented a realistic evolutionary scheme, supported by gene sequences from modern organisms, to suggest that we now know exactly how the clotting system has evolved. That would be making far too much of our limited ability to reconstruct the details of the past. But nonetheless, there is little doubt that we do know enough to develop a plausible and scientifically valid scenario for how it might have evolved. And that scenario makes specific predictions that can be tested and verified against the evidence.”

132 posted on 12/18/2016 10:16:49 AM PST by wintertime (tStop treating government teachers like they are reincarnated Mother Teresas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

Well yeah, as with anything that involves the universe before humans started taking notes it’s unobserved and therefore we’re guessing based on trace evidence and logic. Until somebody invents a time machine we’re kind of stuck with that for astronomy, planetary sciences, geology, anthropology, paleontology, evolutionary science and a bunch of others.


133 posted on 12/18/2016 10:23:10 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: discostu
And that scenario makes specific predictions that can be tested and verified against the evidence.” ( author of the referenced article)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It will be interesting to see the predictions “tested and verified against the evidence’.

134 posted on 12/18/2016 10:37:24 AM PST by wintertime (tStop treating government teachers like they are reincarnated Mother Teresas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

Most of them already have been.


135 posted on 12/18/2016 10:50:11 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: discostu

Anything about DNA you claim as evidence for evolution can be shown to be logically explainable by scenarios other than evolution. To understand this is very important.


136 posted on 12/18/2016 11:10:29 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: discostu

The best way for you to retain credibility is to answer directly. Don’t attempt to avoid or obfuscate. If you recognize that you don’t have an answer for a particular question, or that your idea has been refuted, the best thing to do is be accountable to the truth. I believe this will serve both your credibility and your general well-being.


137 posted on 12/18/2016 11:17:28 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: discostu

I would like to ask you to give examples of speciation.

If speciation is true, there will be both fossils and living species consistent with expected results of evolution.

Think very carefully about the term “expected results.”


138 posted on 12/18/2016 11:18:16 AM PST by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

First you said few words, now you want lots of words. Make up your mind.


139 posted on 12/18/2016 11:28:47 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

I answered directly. You just don’t like the answer so you’re pretending it doesn’t exist. Not my problem.


140 posted on 12/18/2016 11:29:58 AM PST by discostu (Alright you primative screwheads, listen up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-225 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson