"You 're starting to sound like someone who understands evolution . I do n't see your argument here , you 're basically supporting the steps necessary for natural selection . What you describe is one small step for evolution , you just have to repeat this 1,000,000 times over various other environmental and competitive contraints ( sic ) and viola , you 'll probably see evolution at work on a scale that you can recognize . You 're almost there montalban ! -Mach"
"Then a man who needs an artificial heart to survive is a new species of man . That is the analogy I gave , and you ignored . In both cases ; human and bacteria , before the advent of a human product , a particular group of individuals from each larger group would die off . BUT along come a man-made invention that allows those certain portions to live on which otherwise would have died . In once case - nylon , the other , the artificial heart . You call this evolution . Nor is it 'natural selection ' at work either , as in both cases the thing that enabled them to survive was not natural . What you have advanced as a proof of evolution actually proves what ? Natural what ? I suppose people with cochlear implants are new species too because they 've learnt to hear . Another view of this nylon-eating-bug is given ... `` Finally , Mr Cerutti is out of date about this new nylon digesting ability allegedly from a frame shift . New evidence shows that the ability was due to plasmids [ e.g . K. Kato , et al. , ? A plasmid encoding enzymes for nylon oligomer degradation : Nucleotide sequence analysis of pOAD2 ? , Microbiology ( Reading ) 141 ( 10 ) :2585 ? 2590 , 1995 . ] In fact , more than one species of bacteria have the ability , residing on plasmids . This suggests that the information probably already existed , and was just passed between different types of bacteria. `` '' All that would be needed to enable an enzyme to digest nylon is a mutation causing loss of specificity in a proteolytic ( protein-degrading ) enzyme . This may seem surprising ? How would a loss of information create a new ability ? Answer : enzymes are usually tuned very precisely to only one type of molecule ( the substrate ) . Loss of information would reduce the effectiveness of its primary function , but would enable it to degrade other substrates , too . Since both nylon and proteins are broken down by breaking amide linkages , a change in a proteolytic enzyme could also allow it to work on nylon . If this process were continued , the result would be a general enzyme with a weakly catalytic effect on the hydrolysis of too many chemicals to be useful where much selectivity is required . To put it into perspective , acids and alkalis also catalyze many hydrolysis reactions , but they also lack specificity . Indeed , an inhibitor of a protein degrading enzyme also inhibits the action of the nylon degrading enzyme `` http : //www.answersingenesis.org/home ... e7-24-2000.asp Talkorigins gave their usual doubletalk `` Whilst this particular case does not `` prove `` evolution , it is consistent with , and supportive of , the theory of biological evolution. `` Why do they say this ? Because it 's still a bacteria . It 's not like it suddenly became a large multi-cellular organism . But it might just prove that this bug was so well designed that it can cope with newer situations . One site does say that it , the bacteria , had the capability already within it of change ? not resultant in ? mutations ? , but more like switching on previously dormant apparatus . http : //members.tripod.com/aslodge/id89.htm One poster on another forum summed the problem up like this ... `` In order for species to advance there would have to be a net information gain , which is n't the case with nylon eating bacteria . The bacteria gained the ability to digest nylon , therefore was able to survive in a new environment . Two distinct advantages But , the bacteria lost its ability to survive in its old environment , eat its former diet and suffered a 98 % loss in efficiency . Three disadvantages . So by taking two steps forward and three steps backward , where is the net gain ? If nylon eating bacteria was `` proof `` of evolution , we would still be pond scum , but with the ability to digest whatever happened to become the primary food source. `` http : //www.christianforums.com/t52336"
"I do n't see your argument here , you 're basically supporting the steps necessary for natural selection ."
"Then a man who needs an artificial heart to survive is a new species of man . That is the analogy I gave , and you ignored ."