Review The Theory of Evolution:
Natural Selection consists of two components, including (1) Hereditary function and (2) “Beneficial” germline mutations that deliver novel (all-new) allelic traits to viable offspring. The first component can be used to explain the “survival of the fittest” (or micro-evolution), but to explain transmutative evolution as the “arrival of the fittest” (or macro-evolution), beneficial germline mutations are required. That is the focus of the mechanism. Together, Natural Selection (including its two mechanisms) is called Neo-Darwinism.
You have likely never heard anti-biotic resistance explained this way— even if you disagree with me, you should read the answer in full to pry open the box in which you have always been taught.
Antibiotic resistance is proclaimed as a prime example and observable consequence of evolution (via natural selection). The mutation process is involved, but the organisms never transform into anything else. In other words, bacteria remain bacteria. They do not become a sponge, flatworm (or any other novel life form). This alone makes anti-biotic resistance a vastly weak example to defend transmutation evolution— it demonstrates mutations degrading genetic material that render them invisible to our immune system. Read on.
Antibiotic resistance is a manmade “environmental pressure.” Bacteria with a mutation that allows them to survive will live on to reproduce new mutant bacterial strains— some resistant to that antibiotic (or with viruses vaccines). They, therefore, pass this “beneficial” trait to their offspring, a fully resistant generation-1; sounds like Neo-Darwinism—right? It sounds good and has all the buzzwords, but It isn’t macro-evolution. It is a rapid degradation of genetic sequences that almost always weaken and destroy the bacteria (or, as with vaccines, the virus).
In reality, the causes for antibiotic resistance in bacteria can be easily understood by recognizing that bacteria are parasitic invaders, which our natural immune system normally makes short work of destroying. However, the person might sometimes be too weak, old, or compromised to fight the infection by their own immune function alone. Therefore, antibiotics were developed by humans to supercharge our own immunity. These antibiotics (including many vaccines as they work with viruses) instruct our immune system to precisely kill these invaders rapidly by highly specified genetic sequences— sometimes many millions of letters in length. It is stunning immune complexity.
This antibiotic action is supercharged and becomes an unnatural “environmental pressure,” thereby only a “lucky” few that “gained” a genetic mutation become invisible to the hard-working t-cell hitmen of our immune system. This inadvertently permits the survival and replication of the mutated bacteria.-2 These mutated bacteria pass this mutated sequence to their offspring, which can emerge as an antibiotic-resistant generation.-2 Why? Because the antibiotics or vaccines were not designed to destroy this particular genetic sequence in the first place. This is fortuitous, but arguably, this is not transmutative evolution.
The marvel here is not the copy error mutation but the immune system and its incredible ability to kill invaders by specific genetic code translated by the T-cells.-3 Antibiotic resistance is a great example of how mutation invaders escape certain deaths by luck of a random genetic mutation, but this is counterintuitive good fortune at best and provides little evidence to defend Neo-Darwinian evolution.
If antibiotic resistance is adequately understood, it provides an abysmal example supporting universal common descent evolution. Bacteria can be good or bad within the bodies of living organisms. When harmful bacteria enter the body, a myriad of biological weaponry is deployed by our immune system to identify (by genetic sequence), find, and destroy these invaders. Our immunity, not the mutated harmful bacteria, is the true marvel. Some bacterial attacks have been remedied by artificial vaccines designed to help our immune systems eliminate these invaders. The vaccines (like our natural immune systems) receive the “hit” orders by a specific genetic sequence. This information is used by many biological functions, including T-Cells that find and destroy these specific genetically sequenced harmful bacteria. In the end, only the very few bacteria that had been mutated, changing the genetic sequence, are invisible to the “hit.” Now, these survivors multiply and become prevalent. Logically, it is no surprise that the original vaccine, like our immune system, is often ineffective against this new genetically varied strain–but not for long. The process repeats itself repeatedly–just as it has since the beginning. It is factually accurate that mutations occur in nature, and it is also true that they happen in bacteria.
However, like all measurable mutations, they are due to entropy or broken genetics. It can benefit here, as with many other examples of broken genetics. However, considering antibiotic resistance as a prime example of universal common descent evolution or beneficial gains is ill-founded and based on a misunderstanding of biology and the immune system.
What about viruses? They provide evidence for Neo-Darwinian evolution: they mutate and everything!
“Viruses display evolution by mutation”
The Good: This is perhaps the number one claim made by Naturalists (including evolution popularizers) that proclaim mutating viruses are excellent examples of “evolution” in action. They claim the mutation process in viruses, forming them into different variants (altered genetic sequences by mutations), demonstrating Universal Common Descent evolution (UCD) right before our eyes as variants emerge. This claim is widespread.
The reality: Causes for antibiotic resistance in bacteria can be easily understood by beginning with what causes resistance. Bacteria are invaders, and antibiotics are developed to instruct our built-in immune system to kill these invaders. The antibiotic action is an “environmental pressure” because everything works to eradicate the bacteria. Therefore, only those “lucky” few that “gained” a genetic mutation often render them invisible to the hard-working t-cell hitmen. This inadvertently permits survival and replication of the mutated.-2 These mutated bacteria pass this mutated sequence to their offspring, which can emerge as antibiotic-resistant. The marvel here is not the copy error mutation but the immune system and its incredible ability to kill invaders by specific genetic code translated by the T-cells.-3 Antibiotic resistance is an excellent example of how mutations invaders escape certain death by happenstance of a random genetic mutation-4 but not strong evidence for universal common descent evolution.
Effects derived by immune function
Summary: The concept of universal common descent evolution (UCD) is (obviously) based on life. The idea is that “simple” living organisms such as bacteria are transmitted to humans over millions of years. The first problem with viruses being good evidence for UCD is viruses are not alive. They are likely packets of genetic information that escaped once fully functions cellular life. Today they are likely just parasitic genetic debris. The second problem is the chicken or the egg paradox of how viruses would have first emerged. While many imagine that perhaps non-living viruses provided a bridge to the first living organism, such conclusions are paradoxically creating a clear chicken or egg dilemma. Because viruses can only metabolize and replicate inside a live host, that host must have predated the virus itself. Like everything that contains genetics, mutations do occur. However, just as we have found in every conceivable case, modifications are destructive. Mutations cause entropy to operate as a form of unraveling. This is precisely what we observe in viruses. Viruses are bad examples for UCD but are excellent examples of devolution derived from broken genetics. This mutation can be claimed to be a fitness benefit similar to The Sickle Cell mutation. How so? While these conditions did and do provide survival fitness for those affected by deadly diseases, any benefit outside these fortuitous do not objectively exist. Occasionally broken things, counter-intuitively, can provide a subjective benefit. However, claiming such broken genetic functions as driven by mutations are strong evidence for universal common descent evolution is perposterous.