Replies

"Here we see the utility of the theory. Bacteria have a gene for error prone DNA polymerase in addition to its high fidelity one. Each ‘error’ introduces mutations into the bacterial genome. Under stress this gene is expressed in preference to the high fidelity one. The theory of evolution through natural selection of genetic variation has an explanation at the ready for this."

No, this is the fallacy of affirming the consequent in action.

The fact that bacteria have multiple genes and choose to express them differently according to stress-levels is not evidence that these mechanisms and strategies 'evolved'. Unless you invoke logical fallacy, that is.

What exists, exists. That is pure science and scientific evidence. Assuming that it 'evolved' because 'evolution' 'predicts' it is pure logical fallacy. The fallacy of affirming the consequent, that is. Logical fallacy should never be confused with science. Not even if all the scientists believe it. That is simply the fallacy of appeal to popular opinion.

You cannot even understand the argument I am making.

I am not saying the mechanism evolved - the mechanism itself accelerates evolution.

You think gravity explaining the Earth's orbit around the Sun is affirming the consequence - but the scientific method is not a logical fallacy - posting your ignorant drivel about coordinate systems and thinking it explains the glaring hole in your thinking IS a logical fallacy.

So how can YOU explain why a bacteria under stress would chose to introduce mutations into its genome?

This should be amusing! :)