If evolution isn't true, how do bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics? Do new genes just magically appear?
Why do we have so many different types of flu? Why is there a new strain every year?
If all you saw was the corner pocket of the pool table, you might ask how that ball got into the corner pocket. It's similar with all kinds of questions about biology and physics, and everything else.
Just because we don't know the cause and effect processes that cause bacteria to become resistant to diseases, certainly doesn't mean it's evolution. Why there are new strains of flu, has to do with adaptation and cause and effect, both of which are very complex operations.
Random has two basic meanings:
1. We don't know;
2. Pure spontaneity.
Evolution theory says that there has to be random. Which kind is it? The random of us not knowing, or something purely spontaneous in the universe? If it's us not knowing, then why say evolution has anything to do with it? Good guessing?
Everybody knows that there are tons of things that we don't know. But nobody has proof for even one spontaneous happening where something new just came about for no reason. In fact, pure spontaneity is something that doesn't even make sense in our universe.
Regarding your questions, let me add to them the question of all the forces that cause a leaf to sway in the breeze. We can't track even one molecule of air that hits the leaf. We may never be able to so track a molecule.
Your questions don't have answers because we aren't smart enough, or capable enough, yet. Evolution isn't an answer except to the ignorant. And the smart evolutionists know this.
Evolution is a hoax.
BONUS: Read more at the site.
Manuka honey found to eliminate deadly drug-resistant bacteria in cystic fibrosis (CF) infectionsWhen modern medicine can’t solve a health issue, nature often comes to the rescue. Although many people believe that the latest cutting-edge medical developments surely must outperform anything that can be found in nature given the research and money that goes into development, studies like a recent one on cystic fibrosis patients prove that nature still has a valuable place in treating illnesses.
Researchers from Swansea University found that Manuka honey can help treat antimicrobial-resistant respiratory infections, especially the deadly kind that can strike people with cystic fibrosis.
One of the biggest problems that cystic fibrosis patients face are long-lasting respiratory infections. These infections are often deadly because they contain bacteria that resists antibiotics. Although lung transplants can sometimes help in these cases, it’s not a foolproof approach as there are lots of potential side effects and the possibility of re-infection.
For some patients, the type of bacteria infecting them can damage the lungs significantly and even prevent them from being lung transplant candidates. That’s why an effective way to kill these types of bacteria is so desperately needed.
Manuka honey has been shown to kill antibiotic-resistant bacteria in surface wounds, so the researchers decided to look into using it as an alternative to antibiotics in cystic fibrosis patients.
They treated grown bacterial infections in lung tissue from pigs with Manuka honey to see how well it performed. They compared it to the action of three antibiotics sometimes used for such infections: ciprofloxacin, tobramycin, and ceftazidime.
We actually do know the answer, and it's evolution.
When bacteria multiply, some of them get mutations. Most of them make the bacteria die (just like how genetic diseases and cancer, also caused by mutations, are bad for people), but considering that there are trillions of bacteria and that they reproduce literally every day, some of them are bound to get mutations that help them against antibiotics. When you use antibiotics, the normal bacteria all die, while some of the bacteria with "helpful" mutations survive. What's left is all the resistant bacteria, which quickly reproduce (that's why you have to take antibiotics even after you feel better). After that, you end up with mostly resistant bacteria. That's basically how evolution works.
I don't understand why this is hard for scientifically illiterate evolution deniers to understand. Humans have been causing evolution for quite a while, just look at corn before and after we started farming. How did we turn wolves into dogs? How did we turn horses into donkeys? Horses and donkeys (along with wolves and dogs) are different species now, they can reproduce, but the offspring is infertile (as they have different numbers of chromosomes), meaning that they effectively can't pass their genes on if they mate. See, humans were able to make different species through evolution, so evolution is real.
Except that you don't know that mutations and evolution have anything to do with each other. I don't understand why this is hard for scientifically illiterate evolutionists to understand. Oops! I do know why. They are scientifically illiterate.
Cause-and-effect shows us that the reason there are mutations is because innumerable molecules and energy waves bump into each other in precisely the exact way dictated by physics. This makes mutations to be programming, albeit very complex programming.
Just look at corn before and after we started farming. We found that by adding a fish along with each kernel of corn, that the corn would grow better. Then we found that adding fertilizer worked in a similar way. It's all chemical reactions that flow according to the laws of physics in chemistry. There isn't any evolution theory evolution (ETE) involved at all.
Go ahead and turn a wolf into a dog or a horse into a donkey. Can we do this? It isn't evolution. Evolution has to do with nature doing it. You never saw nature turning a bunch of metal and sand and other elements into a car, did you? The idea that nature uses anything other than simple change, like-begets-like, and adaptation to cause differences in plants and animals, has never been observed. Even the so-called evidences of ETE fit simple change, like-begets-like, and adaptation better than they fit ETE. Your examples happen without ETE.
ETE says that there as to be randomness. As I indicated above, there can be only two forms of random:
1. Human ignorance about a process;
2. Pure spontaneity.
Pure spontaneity has never been proven anywhere. There really isn't any evidence for it. So, the randomness in ETE is really human ignorance. Why? Because we don't know the process.
Did you catch
that? HUMAN IGNORANCE is the randomness in ETE. This means that humans don't know that there is any ETE at all. Again,why? Because of their ignorance.
Now, all this writing I am doing is just to show you that there isn't any ETE. If you want proof that there isn't any ETE, delve into this
https://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com/2019/11/9-scientific-facts-prove-theory-of.html.