Hmm-multiple drug resistance, highly lethal parasite--I sure wouldn't.
Thus, this famous argument by the evolutionists actually supports the anti-evolutionists' position--which is that mutations are deleterious...The doctrine of natural selection actually supports the creationists' case.
Mutations are harmful, neutral, or benificial. One example of a mutation that is extremely deleterious in the homozygous state, but confers resistance to malaria in the heterozygous state does not constitute proof that every mutation is harmful. Furthermore, the theory of natural selection does not, in any way, support the creationist view. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole basis of the creationist belief that story in Genesis? Where in Genesis, or anywhere else in the Bible, does it say anything about "microevolution" or any of the other aspects of the theory of evolution that creationists have adopted in their desperate attempt to discredit evolution? Doesn't a literal reading of the Bible lead one to expect no change, ever, if we are to literally believe the Genesis creation story?
Somehow, one species has to "jump" over the thermodynamic barrier to form a new species.
Are you talking about speciation, or enzyme kinetics?
On the other hand, sickle-cell anemia is worse than you may realize. It cripples and kills people.