Antibiotic resistance is not evidence for evolution

Evolutionists commonly cite the antibiotic resistance of germs as evidence for evolution. They believe that the germs must have evolved resistance, implying that they have changed and developed new things that they never had before. Some have said this is one of the best proofs of evolution. Once again science stands in opposition to this evolutionary belief.

Related content
- Evolution and Medicine (http://creation.com/evolution-and-medicine)
- Superbugs not super after all (http://creation.com/superbugs-not-super-after-all)
- Is antibiotic resistance really due to increase in information? (http://creation.com/is-antibiotic-resistance-really-due-to-increase-in-informat­ion)

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Genesis Unleashed
• CMI
• Genesis
• Bible
• evolution
• science
• antibiotic resistance
• bacterial resistance
• germs
• resistant germs
• resistant bacteria
• proof of evolution

[legonut78]

Science slowly fills in gaps in our knowledge. It seems the gaps of uncertainty have shrunk. In this video you state that creatures do change over time. That is evolution. You admit you believe in evolution and natural selection right in this video and your sources. What you are denying is that we fully understand the mechanism. You are correct, however the picture has become far more clear in the last 10 years. You would do your followers, children, and nation a great service to move on.

[CMIcreationstation]

@legonut78 Please watch the video again, you seem to have missed the point. The type of change that scientists observe in living things does not fit with evolution. It fits with all genetic information being there from the start (creation).

[FiverBeyond]

This video is correct that many cases of bacterial resistance is merely a showcase for the power of natural selection.

However, many cases of antibiotic resistance in bacteria have actually been traced down to specific mutations, proving that the resistance was not in the original population. This also proves that beneficial mutations do occur.

If Creationists can move from requiring "beneficial mutations" to "new information", this narrows the field even closer.

[CMIcreationstation]

@FiverBeyond As we summarized in this short video, beneficial mutations certainly do occur. (we refer to H. pylori) But those mutations are still not the type of mutations that are needed for evolution. For a few more details see: creation.com/superbugs-not-sup­er-after-all or just do a search on "antibiotic resistance" at creation.com

[BluJugganaut]

Process for new information - Polyploidy

[CMIcreationstation]

@BluJugganaut Unfortunately for evolution polyploidy won't do it either. See:

creation.com/does-gene-duplica­tion-provide-the-engine-for-ev­olution

[SuperPoliceState]

I was just watching an intro to bio lecture at my university and the professor mentioned bacteria resistance as if it were proof of evolution. I pretty sure brain dead students will think that, but all bacteria resistance proves was that you can artificially select (not natural selection) a certain trait in species. NOT that the species evolved to another species. If people where only to breed with blonds, does that mean that blonds are no longer human?

[RocknForJesus]

Now that's what I'm talkin' 'bout.

[CMIcreationstation]

@Atriviality Please see the references at the bottom of our articles. We are not trying to deceive anyone or promote bad science and we are certainly not saying "just take our word for it." Many of our articles are a response to articles that appear in evolutionary science journals.

[D3V1N3CR34710R]

so true, God's creation in all its variety ist so awesome we will never be able to understand it with our minds

[Atriviality]

I notice none of your links are for medical journals, medical research facilities, or even universities, but rather your own website. So what you're doing is wanting people to take your word for it, rather than investigate it for themselves.