The two most famous examples are cited as undisputed strong evidence for the validity of evolution, the evolution of antibiotic resistance, and the evolution of strains of the S-A-R-S-CoV-2 virus that caused the last coronavirus pandemic! Both examples are evidence of...
The two most famous examples are cited as undisputed strong evidence for the validity of evolution, the evolution of antibiotic resistance, and the evolution of strains of the S-A-R-S-CoV-2 virus that caused the last coronavirus pandemic!
Both examples are evidence of deterioration, not evolution!
But that's okay! In both examples, a mutation change occurred and was fixed in the atom, i.e. the natural selection corner was achieved, so let's admit it's a typical case of evolution occurring.
But what is deliberately hidden is the amount of loss of genetic material and the vital functions to which bacteria are exposed to become resistant to antibiotics, or exposed to the virus (whether SARS viruses or others) to become resistant to drugs.
Under selective pressure, it becomes a battlefield: whenever you point a weapon at a particular trait of bacteria or viruses, you will kill the most genetically and biologically competent individuals, and the least efficient ones will remain who do not have that trait you are targeting, and so evolution occurs, but it has evolved through loss rather than gain.
Imagine if the first cell was created, and this was the only way to evolve, to evolve through the loss of genes and biological functions, that would certainly have killed life in its infancy!
But the truth is, it didn't happen!
The theory of evolution posits that the first hypothesized cell underwent an evolution that acquired new genes and biological traits, until we reached millions or billions of multicellular species and biological functions.
In 2010, Dr. Michael Behe reviewed papers from the Experimental Evolution Branch, and extrapolated these papers to find that most micro- and micro-level adaptations are “resulting from the loss or modification of pre-existing molecular function.” In other words, Darwinian evolution is assumed to advance at the expense of weak resistance, but what Behe found is that organisms are far from evolving by losing existing biochemical functions, compared to their proximity to evolution through the acquisition of new ones.
Behe thus concluded that "the rate of onset of adaptive mutation that may arise from the reduction or elimination of protein activity may be 100 to 1000 times greater than the rate of onset of adaptive mutation that requires specific gene changes"!!!
The preponderance of loss (or decrease) of function logically requires that the molecular functions of the evolution-subject population be depleted as a result of loss or decrease of function. This thus confirms that if Darwinian evolution were effective, it would have wiped out life in its infancy.
Michael J. Behe, “Experimental Evolution, Loss-of-Function Mutations, and ‘The First Rule of Adaptive Evolution,’” The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 85(4):1-27 (December 2010).
—
Source: Published on Facebook's "Braheen Center" page