Take antibiotic resistance, for instance, which is commonly cited by evolution science as a sterling example of "evolution".
Antibiotic resistance involves nothing more natural selection, in the form of a cull of most the various strains of a certain species. So antibiotic resistance doesn't produce a more complex, more evolved organism than what was already there. The bugs that survive the antibiotic don't undergo any change to "become" resistant - they were already resistant.
Yes, just look at antibiotic resistance. For resistance to beta-lactams like methicillin requires changes to a protein necessary for cell wall synthesis; macrolide resistance can occur from modification of the ribosome, essential in protein synthesis; quinolone resistance needs to modify a protein responsible for supercoiling of DNA to prevent damage of the DNA; and co-trimoxazole resistance involves changes to enzymes involved in the folic acid pathway, necessary for the bases used in DNA/RNA synthesis.
These may not be a change in complexity, however you feel like measuring it, but they do represent modifications to pathways that are highly critical to the survival of the cell. If mutations can cause such significant changes without killing the organism, why is it so surprising that less significant changes in protein expression in multi-cellular organisms can result in the diversity we see in species today?
Edited by Meddle, : No reason given.
Edited by Meddle, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
