Yeah, I’m quoting myself again. Before you say otherwise, I was referring to what you were saying about the bacteria adapting, not the study itself. I haven’t had an opportunity look it up yet

I must say, that was a good argument. However, if you read that closely, this is nothing but natural breeding. The same thing happens with dogs, although the dogs have humans guiding the changes. I must say though, very nice point.

I am interested, though, in what evidence you have for creation? Please share it with us.

If you read one of my previous comments (you probably haven’t) I don’t have proof for evolution. It is simply faith that makes me believe. I can’t proof it. And no matter how much testable evidence you have for evolution, you can’t without a doubt prove it either. So both of us operate on faith.

…creationism is not science.

Who said it was creationism (and Christianity, Judaism and every other similar belief, including evolution, because it describes how everything came about) is a religion. Not a science. And as far as I know no one (except the christian scientists, and even I know that they’re nuts) ever said it was.

whereas you flat out state you will never accept any of the mountains of evidence supporting evolution.

You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. And besides, what evidence you have is all open to interpretation. I interpret the evidence differently than you. It happens all the time throughout history. For example, Ptolemy and Copernicus interpreted the universe differently. So did Galileo and Aristotle. And don’t get me started on the roman catholic church in the time of those people. I don’t find your evidence compelling, and I don’t have any evidence except my faith. So we reach a stalemate.

“Matter must have a source, therefore there must be a source for matter.” (With the implication that the source is a god.) But there is no support for the opening statement, it is just an expression of opinion. As the BadAstronomer has said over and over, evidence, please.

It is an opinion. And the implication is there because that’s what I believe. Similar to the way all of your statements imply evolution. And now my turn. In regard your theory that there doesn’t have to be a source, and that there is no god or similar being, and that creationism could not be (not that it is unlikely, that it is impossible) evidence, please. And don’t start of on how that’s my only proof. As long as you’re going to ask me for proof, I want to know if you can prove anything you say. Just another opinion

So, it’s circular reasoning to wonder where matter comes from? And besides, I never said it was proof. I said it was evidence
No, it is not evidence. It is circular reasoning.

“Matter must have a source, therefore there must be a source for matter.” (With the implication that the source is a god.) But there is no support for the opening statement, it is just an expression of opinion.

As the BadAstronomer has said over and over, evidence, please.

You will never convince me. I will never convince you.

Therein lies the prime reason creationism is not science. If you had compelling evidence, I would accept your theory, whereas you flat out state you will never accept any of the mountains of evidence supporting evolution.

Umm…adaptation is an aspect of evolution. Drug-resistant bacteria are different strains. They have some mutation that makes them slightly different from their “cousins”, as it were, and which confer greater resistance to drugs. As their cousins get killed off, the population as a whole grows stronger, as the resistant ones proliferate and spread. If you look at the genetic makeup of one of these today, and compare it to a similar ancestor from a decade or two ago, I’m pretty sure that you will find they are different. Even better if you can actually trace the ancestry back. And, it just so happens, that this has been done, though not with drug-resistant bacteria. There was just a recent study on E. coli that proved that, at the very least, bacteria evolve. Take a look at that study. I believe it was at the Mayo Clinic? Can’t remember off hand.

So, we’ve provided some testable evidence that supports evolution. And keep in mind, that Evolutionary Theory does not even address origins of life, so don’t bother with that line of argument. I am interested, though, in what evidence you have for creation? Please share it with us.

What created the source?

Oh, right. It’s the exception that proves the rule.

So, it’s circular reasoning to wonder where matter comes from? And besides, I never said it was proof. I said it was evidence

The fossil record?
Molecular biology?
Evolution of drug-resistant bacteria?

The Fossil record = similarities in animals. Dead ones, but animals still. Molecular biology = I haven’t researched it yet. Which I admitted could happen. Evolution of drug-resistant bacteria = Not evolution. They don’t evolve. They adapt.

You will never convince me. I will never convince you.

Yeah, I quoted myself. You know, In at least one way, you’ve actually proven me right. I said we would never convince each other, and that happened. And I guarantee, this will keep going on pretty much until the end of time. Or until a nuclear war kills us all. Either one. But the point is, as long as you believe what you do, I’m proven right. Which is oddly satisfying.