Evolution - Who wants to KNOW?

If bacteria is able to find new strains for survival, is that evolution?

A theory in science is , once more for the recent entries iinto this thread:

"An explanation for a phenomena in which all the evidence supports AND no evidence yet refutes"
TThats why evolution is a theory, not a proposal or hypotthesis.
All the evidence supports it

nothing(datawise) out there refutes it

cicerone imposter wrote:

If bacteria is able to find new strains for survival, is that evolution?

No - it's ADAPTATION or VARIATION, usually as a result of MUTATION.

Bottom line...it's still a bacterium.

Proliferation of antibiotic-resistant bacteria provides a dramatic example of evolution because of its rapidity as well as its medical importance. Medical science uses our understanding of evolution on a daily basis to counter the evolution of anti-biotic resistant bacteria.

Miller and Bib, Thanks for the clarification. Here's the confusion; you see, the 14 finches of the Galapagos 'ADAPTED' to their environment by changes in their beaks to survive. Kinda applying that same principal to bacteria sounded logical.

That's funny, your answer looks suspiciously close to a simplistic definition of evolution: The accumulation of ADAPTATION and VARIATION as a result of MUTATION under the filter of SELECTION.

I wonder if the problem here is that you are trying to "trap" evolution into a single event, when no single event can ever represent evolution.

It's like trying to understand calculus without understanding sums, or like trying to trap an electron at a particular place and time. No single generation of bacteria, or anything else, is ever going to produce a new species. But change accumulates none the less, and the results many generations down the line will no longer be the same species as the progenitor.

the DNA change is a result, not necessarily a cause of evolution , the term "exaptation" is Vrbnas and Goulds word for what was earlier called "pre-adaptation" Recent work on junk DNA has shown that, in recombination , some of the variability and diversity is brought into play within the coding sections of the genome. So, tthe finches had a built in diversity that manifest itself by exaptation, eg the crushing beak and its attendant DNA was brought forward from an existing diversity pool, it wasnt conveniently "mutated" Evolution starts with an individual then gows to a community

Isnt this what we agree on?

Its evolution nonettheless.

Looks like YOU have a "simplistic definition of evolution", Ros.

Also, it looks like various A2K members on this thread have differing opinions as to what they believe Evolution is!

Here's a suggestion...when you understand the difference between microevolution and macroevolution you'll come to a conclusion as to what you mean the next time you use the word Evolution in a sentence.

As I've observed throughout this thread, far too many A2K members use the word Evolution with total glibness. I think it's time some of you did a bit of serious reading on the subject and began to learn what Evolution IS; and what Evolution is defined AS.

LOL - Darwinism at its worst! Stick to Earth Sciences, Farmer, and leave the speculative biological mutations to the Neodarwinists.

They started as finches and ended as finches.

Bib, apparently youve read nothing(or remembered nothing) of Goulds work, he did a speciation series in "The Structure"... as well as in some of his more popular works, like "The Pandas thumb".