I was scanning the Letters to WorldNetDaily today and I came across one referring to Farah's article Why I believe in Creation. The letter writer gives one of the two classic Evolutionist arguments that supposedly "prove" that aviation happened. The first is the fruit-fly-mutation argument, the second is the antibiotic-resistant-bacteria argument. The letter writer used the second, so I am addressing that one.
For starters, it should be noted that drug resistant bacteria have been found in the stomachs of corpses frozen in the tundra for over 100 years. But to debunk any similar argument... Ever wonder why there is a different flu shot every year? Cues there are different forms of the bug that are prominent every year. Not the same bug, but of the same family and they do similar things. Assuming a range of different forms of the bug (26 for ease, A-Z) one drug will work for many, but not all. Say penicillin kills everything but the vowels (which are drug-resistant naturally) What is left to breed? AEIO+U. So what do they breed? after their own kind. Well guess what? the old drug doesnt work anymore. Why? cuz it killed off everything it could. Does this mean that AEIO+U mutated? Nope. Just means that you couldnt kill them that way in the first place.
Occam's Razor states "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitas." (Plurality should not be posited without necessity.) Or easier said "One should always choose the simplest explanation of a phenomenon, the one that requires the fewest leaps of logic." Which is the simplest explanation? There was an actual, beneficial mutation (never seen before in the history of science)? or the one just given?