The disease didn’t “evolve”. It mutated. Big difference. Evolve implies improvemnt. The disease didn’t improve, it’s still a virus, it didn’t grow arms and legs, a brain or otherwise “improve”. It just mutated into different strains. Adaptation is not evolution.
I would call “greater resistance to drugs” an improvement in fitness.
That said, Doonesbury is like the comic strip included by the OP in that neither of them is really all that funny.
No, evolution does not imply improvement. Have you ever bothered to read a single book about evolutionary theory?
"The disease didn’t improve, it’s still a virus, it didn’t grow arms and legs, a brain or otherwise improve'."
Your understanding of evolutionary theory is flat-out retarded. Nothing in the theory implies, requires, or suggests that viruses need to change in this way.
"It just mutated into different strains. Adaptation is not evolution."
Wrong again. Adaptation is evolution, as long as the adaptation has a heritable basis. If you don't like this fact, then go cry in a corner.
Executive Summary: Virtually every sentence of your post contained gross errors of fact or logic. You have no knowledge of the basic definitions of evolutionary theory, no understanding of the fundamental reasoning and data that comprises the theory, and lack either the self-reflective capacity or the mental health to recognize your own ignorance. Your presence in even this informal debate is as incongruous as a Democrat at the Business Roundtable, and your contribution similarly valuable.