Ill just deal with this point because if we can establish what is true here regarding new information being created and passed on,it has a great bearing on naturalists claims on the extent of evolution.
Now you claim that bacteria exhibiting resistance is the result of new genetic information.however this isnt the case at all and let me reiterate its actually quite a simple process.
Some bacteria already has resistance,and its those particular bacteria that survive.
Once again, the question remains: how did those particular bacteria get the resistance in the first place? Bacteria do not come with resistances to
all antibiotics; only a small fraction have the fluke genetics that give them a resistance. So where did that small fraction get their resistance from?
There can be also bacteria mutating to not allow the antibiotics entry into the cell .This is an example of bacteria losing information
No, it is not. Antibiotics work on six major areas of the bacterium:
- Construction of the bacterium's cell wall,
- Structure of the cell membrane,
- Synthesis and function of folic acid,
- Structure, synthesis, and function, of DNA,
- Synthesis of RNA from DNA, and
- Structure, assembly, folding, and function, of proteins.
A mutation to any of these processes or structures increase the bacterium's ability to function in the presence of the antibiotic. Information is created by mutations, and this extra information changes how, say, proteins are synthesised.
One example of increased information is a point insertion mutation in the genes that encode the ion pattern in an enzyme's lock-and-key mechanism. Point insertion mutations have a chance of adding extra ions to the mechanism: information is increased, and the bacterium has an increased resistance.
However theres no new information created it was present already or its a loss of information.
Again, this simply isn't true. DNA can mutate by any number of means, and the 'information' can increase, decrease, or be replaced by new information (e.g., by chiasmata formation).
Theres no cases of new information being made by mutation anywhere by anything...
Two words: point mutation.
And the funny thing is that the bacteria that would survive antibiotics in a lab are significantly weaker if released back into the wild,proving that loss of information is hazardous.
You haven't showed that bacteria acquire resistance by the loss of information, or that they are "significantly weaker" when released into the wild.
You also seem to forget that antibiotics exist in nature as well; how do you think bacteria survived for all those millennia if they were constantly losing 'information', if they were "significantly weaker"?
Whats the wider implication for evolutionists with common descent?...pretty obvious really.
Yep: absolutely no implication whatsoever. We'll continue to advance in medicine, armed with the knowledge of how bacteria, viruses, and fungi, acquire resistances to our drugs.
I'm amazed that you still think bacteria come pre-equipped with resistances to our completely man-made drugs. What, did God created them with the foreknowledge?
