[allmendream]

They would EXACTLY AND PRECISELY undergo a change in genetic makeup.

In response to stress a bacteria will undergo its stress response. Part of this stress response is to increase its own mutation rate and decrease its mutation repair rate. Mutations, for those of you in Rio Linda, IS A CHANGE IN THE GENETIC MAKEUP.

Therefore a bacteria under stress increases its natural tendency to mutate its DNA, thereby changing its genetic makeup.

[GourmetDan]

"Therefore a bacteria under stress increases its natural tendency to mutate its DNA, thereby changing its genetic makeup."

While bacteria exhibit this complex biological ability, it never occurs to the evolutionist that they merely *assume* that this ability 'evolved'.

The fallacy of Affirming the Consequent lives on...

[metmom]

Therefore a bacteria under stress increases its natural tendency to mutate its DNA, thereby changing its genetic makeup.

So you're saying that the bacteria itself can manage its own mutation rate, and that mutations do not happen at random?

Whatever happened to mutations are random but selected through outside pressure?

[so_real]

Therefore a bacteria under stress increases its natural tendency to mutate its DNA, thereby changing its genetic makeup.

Remember the Lenksi experiment? Turns out it was still E. coli with an operon flipped on. I would be sincerely interested in a citation evidencing a "gain" in genetic information. Simply expressing different genetic traits already inherent in the organism in response to environmental stress is not sufficient evidence for speciation. Adaptation and natural selection, yes. Macro-Evolution, no. When you plate E. coli and stress it into H. pylori, I'll print this post and eat it.

[so_real]

What is “Rio Linda”? I’m not familiar with that expression.