[kkindt]

Bacteria do not become resistant to antibotics. It's just that the ones that are resistant survive and the other ones die out. But the resistant ones were there in the first place. There is no evidence that mutations caused that resistance in some that others did not have. It is just possible that ALL of the bacteria at one point in history HAD that resistance but some, through mutations LOST IT.

There is no proof that mutations gave the surving bacteria that resistance. NONE. Cite your scientific research for this one. It is just that you have accepted the common assumption that is SOME creatures survive and others die out and some have a feature that helped them surive that that feature MUST HAVE been the result of a mutation. WHY SO? If you do not observe the mutation happening - it is possible that the DNA Of this creature contained that feature and some received it and some lost it. HOW the feature got there in the first place SCIENCE DOES NOT KNOW but scientist do speculate.

[Junior]

It's just that the ones that are resistant survive and the other ones die out.

And how did those few bacteria get their antibiotic resistance? Were they specially created that way or did they descend from non-resistant bacteria? If they were specially created that way, why would God create a bacteria that would defeat man's attempts to survive it? Does God hate people that much?

[Lurking Libertarian]

There is no proof that mutations gave the surving bacteria that resistance. NONE. Cite your scientific research for this one.

Try here.

[Right Wing Professor]

There is no proof that mutations gave the surving bacteria that resistance. NONE. Cite your scientific research for this one.

Oooh, ooh, let me!

This paper and others it cites shows both in vitro and in vivo that antibiotic resistance to cefotaxime, cefuroxime, ceftazadime, and aztreonam evolved by single amino-acid substitutions from an ancestral penicillinase gene. The authors conclusion (and I quote) "The authors take this result as evidence that their in vitro evolution technique accurately mimics natural evolution and can therefore be used to predict the results of natural evolutionary processes. "

Predicting evolutionary potential: In vitro evolution accurately reproduces natural evolution of the TEM b-lactamase. Barlow, Miriam; Hall, Barry G. Biology Department, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA. Genetics (2002), 160(3), 823-832.

[whattajoke]

So wait... the fossil record (planted by satan) is actually a snapshot of all those species who "devolved" to the point of extinction? And the current scientific understanding that these fossils represent a progression, of sorts, are wrong in that they *actually* show "devolved" species that didn't start out with the "top of the line" mutation/perfection dna code?

dude, I smell MAJOR grant money and awards for you! You've turned all biology, paleontology, geology, genetics, and many more on their heads! And to think... we all knew you back when you were just a freeper...

Good luck with your first peer reviewed paper!

/creationist backslapping mode>

[f.Christian]

When I went from catholic grade school to public HS I read all this liberal brave new world 1984 ayn rand libertarian schlock and thank God I was immunized to all this atheist evolution drivel brainwashing // indoctrination but not like these fr evoborg - botnik - zombies public grade scool cult --- haiti vodoo science pagan religion bone - fossil thumpers !