It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman
Why do you keep calling said bacteria a virus?
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Raggedyman
No no. You carry on telling people they're using faith lol.
Funny how this single experiment shows you the proof of evolution you've so desperately been crying for, yet you deny it. Not only do you deny it, you get it arse backwards.
So, carry on being the fool. I'm enjoying watching it.
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Akragon
I don't think he watched the video or read the article. Or maybe he thinks all bacteria are viruses?
Who knows. It's still funny to watch him.
I am asking what information is added to the virus to prove evolution, i dont see evolution, and you refuse to back it up with any evidence
Ok then Ak
My mistake, bacteria, it was silly of me, bacteria it is.
I was wrong, oops, its bacteria, please I am sorry, silly me, said virus not bacteria, ba bong, wrong. oops, sorry
Can you prove the antibiotic wasnt effective or was and the BACTERIA has had the capacity to move forward with
A No Change
B Some Change
C Evolved enhanced change
BACTERIA
originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Raggedyman
I'm not stopping your religious crusade to try and prove evolution wrong. Have at it.
Just know that this has turned from a good thread about evolution and bacteria adapting, to a thread about you being hilarious.
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman
I am asking what information is added to the virus to prove evolution, i dont see evolution, and you refuse to back it up with any evidence
Really...
After you just said this...
Ok then Ak
My mistake, bacteria, it was silly of me, bacteria it is.
I was wrong, oops, its bacteria, please I am sorry, silly me, said virus not bacteria, ba bong, wrong. oops, sorry
Can you prove the antibiotic wasnt effective or was and the BACTERIA has had the capacity to move forward with
A No Change
B Some Change
C Evolved enhanced change
BACTERIA
ya...
Watch the video... again
www.theatlantic.com...
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman
I am asking what information is added to the virus to prove evolution, i dont see evolution, and you refuse to back it up with any evidence
Really...
After you just said this...
Ok then Ak
My mistake, bacteria, it was silly of me, bacteria it is.
I was wrong, oops, its bacteria, please I am sorry, silly me, said virus not bacteria, ba bong, wrong. oops, sorry
Can you prove the antibiotic wasnt effective or was and the BACTERIA has had the capacity to move forward with
A No Change
B Some Change
C Evolved enhanced change
BACTERIA
ya...
Watch the video... again
www.theatlantic.com...
Really, how is that evolution, thats the question still?
originally posted by: Raggedyman
Yeah but the problem is the mutation never, ever, ever mutates into something better, it ALWAYS de-evolves, no new information is EVER added into a virus mutation
Sorry to make it look like false science but it is false science
Also makes Darwinism look redundant, evolution by mutation, not natural selection as supposed
discovermagazine.com...
Its not evidence of evolution, its just phony science
Why not show empirical evidence rather than phony evidence
Why do people hate science, why do those who support evolution manipulate and abuse science in this way.
Just look at MRSA. A strain of Staphylococcus aureus that has evolved to be resistant against methicillin.
Scientists have always believed that the soil was teeming with new and potent antibiotics because bacteria have developed novel ways to fight off other microbes.
But 99 per cent of microbes will not grow in laboratory conditionsleaving researchers frustrated that they could not get to the life-saving natural drugs.
Now a team from Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts, have discovered a way of using an electronic chip to grow the microbes in the soil and then isolate their antibiotic chemical compounds.
They discovered that one compound, Teixobactin, is highly effective against common bacterial infections Clostridium difficile, Mycobacterium tuberculous and Staphylococcus aureus.
I'm kind of for AND against antibiotics. While they're a good thing (think of all the things that aren't around or aren't as wide spread as they used to be), I personally think we don't let our bodies do enough to build up a natural defence to some of the least harmful ones.
originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Astyanax
I recall reading a study whereby hospitals sought to stay ahead of the evolving bacteria by cycling varieties of antibiotics. It's a 'war' that can't be won and, hopefully, won't be lost.
Coincidentally, I'm currently on a course of Augmentin for bacterial tonsillitis. ... One is I should take a dose closer to bed time and the other is maybe some of the bacteria have evolved and become slightly more resistant by morning. I'll spread the doses today and see the effect in the morning.