OK, am a microbiology student and in my lecture last week in MCB 406 (Pharmaceutical microbiology), we were dealing with bacterial resistance to antimicrobial agents.
Some bacteria resist attack by drug inactivation through chemical modification of the drug, I will just give two examples.
1. Some bacteria do this by hydrolysis of the beta lactam ring of beta lactam antibiotics like penicillin.
2. Some add chemical groups to the drug eg some bacteria render chloramphenicol inactive by adding Acety COA to it two hydroxyl groups.

After the lecture this got me thinking, how the hell do these tiny unicellular organisms know what to do to inactive an antibiotic. Notice that the chemical modification of these drugs is targeted to a specific part of the structure of the drugs. The inactivation of beta lactam antibiotics is targeted precisely to the core beta lactam ring, that of chloramphenicol is to the hydroxyl group and is not just the addition of any chemical but Acetyl COA to be precise.
So the question is where do these unicellular microbes get the intelligence and knowledge to do all these PRECISE modifications, how do they know which molecule to add to which part of the structure of the drug?
In addition to the above phenomenon, there is what is called antibiosis which is a microbial interaction, this occurs when there is limited space, nutrient etc, one microbe then produce a compound(antibiotic) that will inhibit the growth of other microbe in that environment in other for it to have a higher probability of surviving. Penicillin was actually discovered in this type of interaction.
I can understand the need to survival but how do these microbes know which substance to produce that wouldn't be harmful to them but to other microbes? How did they know what will inhibit others? When did they study the physiology of the other microbes?
Also, if bacteria that get a certain nutrient eg folic acid from their environment are subjected to an environment with low folic acid content, even though many generations of these bacteria will die but at a time there will arise strains able to grow in this environment because they've simply developed the ability to synthesis folic acid themselves. We ought to note that this is an ability alien to them before, they're not programmed to do this, they've never done it before, so how did they know how to Bio synthesize this compound. Anyone with knowledge of biochemistry will know the complex chemical reactions, pathways, enzymes required for Bio synthesis.
I can imagine a human saying I need this product and if I can't get it from the market I can make it domestically but can't imagine the microbe saying, OK I need folic acid and if I can't get it again from the environment I will use this substrate, these enzymes etc to synthesize one, if they can't do this where do they get the ability to Bio synthesize.
Even in evolution we only here that this organism developed this ability or organ because it is required for survival, we were never told how they were able to manufacture the organ.
When the first set of organisms reached the land, they only have the "desire" or need to survive on land they didn't know how it is going to happen but millions of years later it happened but HOW?
In antimicrobial resistance to drugs, evolution, adaptation etc the driving force is the desire or need of this organism to survive in the environment, they all have the survival instinct but who or what is making this possible? Creating organs, tissues, abilities needed for there survival?
Even though I have my way of making sense of all these and doesn't claim it's the truth just what makes sense to me as at now and will probably share it later, what do you especially the atheists and materialists personally think of this?

Another long post will read get back to you

modified
A bacteria has shown possiblity of evolving, talk more of a human beings.
I rently gave examples of animals that where immortal, some could see at night,regenerate.

Where as the so called Books defile logic and common scence

What does the fact that more experienced and even world renowned microbiologist believe in evolution, tell you?
I mean they know more right? So shouldn't they be more skeptic if it were impossible.

Creation by design is an illusion created by the beauty and precise nature of evolution
My own two cents anyway.

Lennycool:
What does the fact that more experienced and even world renowned microbiologist believe in evolution, tell you?
I mean they know more right? So shouldn't they be more skeptic if it were impossible.

Creation by design is an illusion created by the beauty and precise nature of evolution
My own two cents anyway.

Mind you I also believe in evolution but the only thing we know that drives evolution is the survival instinct, how is this converted to creation of specific tissue, organ, system that will make it possible.
For example if an animal specie requires a long neck for survival, how is it that millions or so years later it actually has the long neck? How was the need for long neck created the long neck?
Like I said, I believe that every complexity we see in living organisms today is a product of millions of evolution but is the instinct to survival or adapt to an environment alone able to create this complexity?

justlove91:

Mind you I also believe in evolution but the only thing we know that drives evolution is the survival instinct, how is this converted to creation of specific tissue, organ, system that will make it possible.
For example if an animal specie requires a long neck for survival, how is it that millions or so years later it actually has the long neck? How was the need for long neck created the long neck?
Like I said, I believe that every complexity we see in living organisms today is a product of millions of evolution but is the instinct to survival or adapt to an environment alone able to create this complexity?

Yeah survival is the basis of evolution. For animals to just want to have a long neck is not enough, their survival must depend on it. This is why evolution is tied with natural selection.
If a longer neck favours a specie, those with shorter necks will die out as they would be unable to compete.
Lets imagine, five dogs are born and their food source is in an upraised platform, the dog with the longer neck(no matter how slight) will be more favoured to survive. This dog gives birth to puppies with even longer necks as genes are passed on, these puppies with long neck genes create more offsprings with even longer necks. The dogs with the smaller necks will by now begin to die out as they are unable to compete for food. Natural selection. The fittest survive. It doesn't matter how the first dog got the long neck, whether it be a birth defect/mutation or luck as long as he's more suited to survive and can pass his good genes on. Good.
There is no conscious intelligent effort by the gene or DNA, the advantageous gene whether it came about by luck or a mutation will be present and aggravated in the offsprings of the specie.
And before you know it(say a million years) they all have long necks. Selection my dear. Natural selection. Hope this clears your question.

Lennycool:


Yeah survival is the basis of evolution. For animals to just want to have a long neck is not enough, their survival must depend on it. This is why evolution is tied with natural selection.
If a longer neck favours a specie, those with shorter necks will die out as they would be unable to compete.
Lets imagine, five dogs are born and their food source is in an upraised platform, the dog with the longer neck(no matter how slight) will be more favoured to survive. This dog gives birth to puppies with even longer necks as genes are passed on, these puppies with long neck genes create more offsprings with even longer necks. The dogs with the smaller necks will by now begin to die out as they are unable to compete for food. Natural selection. The fittest survive. It doesn't matter how the first dog got the long neck, whether it be a birth defect/mutation or luck as long as he's more suited to survive and can pass his good genes on. Good.
There is no conscious intelligent effort by the gene or DNA, the advantageous gene whether it came about by luck or a mutation will be present and aggravated in the offsprings of the specie.
And before you know it(say a million years) they all have long necks. Selection my dear. Natural selection. Hope this clears your question.

Yes I know about natural selection, I don't think anybody will read about evolution without knowing anything about natural selection. But natural selection is simply the selection of those with the desirable ability, it tells us nothing about how the ability comes to be.
In the example you gave with the dogs, the long neck is already present in some of them so it just needs the natural selection of this kind of dog but what happened in cases where the desired ability was never present before? how does the ability comes about before natural selection can favor those with it.
For example, there is a mixed culture of microbes living "happily" then there happens to be shorted of space, nutrient or water, then one group in other to survive producer antibiotics to inhibit the growth of the other microbes, naturally this group will be favored by natural selection and may later be the only one left in the environment, my question is how are they able to know which specific compound to produce that will specifically inhibit the other but not them? mutation? I don't think mutation is that precise, and if it is mutation how is it that it happened at the precise time the organism needed it?

GRIMMJOE:
Another long post will read get back to you

modified
A bacteria has shown possiblity of evolving, talk more of a human beings.
I rently gave examples of animals that where immortal, some could see at night,regenerate.

Where as the so called Books defile logic and common scence

I don't quiet understand you.

justlove91:

Mind you I also believe in evolution but the only thing we know that drives evolution is the survival instinct, how is this converted to creation of specific tissue, organ, system that will make it possible.
For example if an animal specie requires a long neck for survival, how is it that millions or so years later it actually has the long neck? How was the need for long neck created the long neck?
Like I said, I believe that every complexity we see in living organisms today is a product of millions of evolution but is the instinct to survival or adapt to an environment alone able to create this complexity?

Sorry sir.
It is not instincts that drive Evolution.
Chemistry, Biology and Physics drive Evolution.

You forget, OP, that whereas you have barely 200 yrs accumulated knowledge of chemistry and microbiology, the bacteria that you talk about have a cumulative biochemical information spanning at least 2 billion years.
So, my friend, it shouldn't surprise you at all that microscopic bacteria have a much more sophisticated knowledge of biochemistry than you do.

Don't let that fact deflate your ego.

justlove91:

I don't quiet understand you.

Ok

justlove91:

Yes I know about natural selection, I don't think anybody will read about evolution without knowing anything about natural selection. But natural selection is simply the selection of those with the desirable ability, it tells us nothing about how the ability comes to be.
In the example you gave with the dogs, the long neck is already present in some of them so it just needs the natural selection of this kind of dog but what happened in cases where the desired ability was never present before? how does the ability comes about before natural selection can favor those with it.
For example, there is a mixed culture of microbes living "happily" then there happens to be shorted of space, nutrient or water, then one group in other to survive producer antibiotics to inhibit the growth of the other microbes, naturally this group will be favored by natural selection and may later be the only one left in the environment, my question is how are they able to know which specific compound to produce that will specifically inhibit the other but not them? mutation? I don't think mutation is that precise, and if it is mutation how is it that it happened at the precise time the organism needed it?

https://www.nairaland.com/1859229/ye-gods-all-all-100

In this thread, I attempted to show that microbes rule us.
They are our masters and we are their minions.

justlove91:

Yes I know about natural selection, I don't think anybody will read about evolution without knowing anything about natural selection. But natural selection is simply the selection of those with the desirable ability, it tells us nothing about how the ability comes to be.
In the example you gave with the dogs, the long neck is already present in some of them so it just needs the natural selection of this kind of dog but what happened in cases where the desired ability was never present before? how does the ability comes about before natural selection can favor those with it.
For example, there is a mixed culture of microbes living "happily" then there happens to be shorted of space, nutrient or water, then one group in other to survive producer antibiotics to inhibit the growth of the other microbes, naturally this group will be favored by natural selection and may later be the only one left in the environment, my question is how are they able to know which specific compound to produce that will specifically inhibit the other but not them? mutation? I don't think mutation is that precise, and if it is mutation how is it that it happened at the precise time the organism needed it?

What you fail to realise is that species do go extinct, its not always success stories, sometimes they just can't adapt fast enough, or no one possessed favourable genes to pass on, and they die out. In the case of the dog, if non of them had any favourable gene to pass on, and their species were threatened they would become extinct. The dinosaurs couldn't adapt fast enough to the changed earth and most of them died, the ones that could (ancestors of the birds) survived.
So if a specie doesn't have favourable genes(whether it got these genes by mutation or not) to help it survive its environment it wil die. And if they do posses favourable genes they survive.

you should prioritize learning English other than wasting time on an "inexistent" God.

GRIMMJOE:
Another long post will read get back to you

modified
A bacteria has shown possiblity of evolving, talk more of a human beings.
I rently gave examples of animals that where immortal, some could see at night,regenerate.

Where as the so called Books defile logic and common scence

Lennycool:


What you fail to realise is that species do go extinct, its not always success stories, sometimes they just can't adapt fast enough, or no one possessed favourable genes to pass on, and they die out. In the case of the dog, if non of them had any favourable gene to pass on, and their species were threatened they would become extinct. The dinosaurs couldn't adapt fast enough to the changed earth and most of them died, the ones that could (ancestors of the birds) survived.
So if a specie doesn't have favourable genes(whether it got these genes by mutation or not) to help it survive its environment it wil die. And if they do posses favourable genes they survive.

OK let assume the dinosaur doesn't have favorable gene to pass on but have enough time, will they've eventually been later able to produce the needed gene or they would still go extinct even when having enough time?

justlove91:

OK let assume the dinosaur doesn't have favorable gene to pass on but have enough time, will they've eventually been later able to produce the needed gene or they would still go extinct even when having enough time?

It would be nearly impossible for them to be given enough time and yet not randomly develop favourable genes as they reproduce, but even this wouldn't be enough as the environmental change that met them was to swift, it was impossible to adapt at such speeds, since adaptation is tied to reproduction.
So say the dinosaurs had enough time to reproduce and yet couldn't produce any favourable gene. They would all be wiped out by the change that came.
Life is cruel if you can't adapt you die.

Lennycool:

It would be nearly impossible for them to be given enough time and yet not randomly develop favourable genes as they reproduce, but even this wouldn't be enough as the environmental change that met them was to swift, it was impossible to adapt at such speeds, since adaptation is tied to reproduction.
So say the dinosaurs had enough time to reproduce and yet couldn't produce any favourable gene. They would all be wiped out by the change that came.
Life is cruel if you can't adapt you die.

I understand you, but if they are eventually able to produce favorable gene how did they do that since it doesn't exist before? mutation? luck?

justlove91:

I understand you, but if they are eventually able to produce favorable gene how did they do that since it doesn't exist before? mutation? luck?

Probability my man. Lets say there are 10,000 dogs of a certain specie and they all reproduce, it is impossible that their some of their offsprings will not posses genes that will be favourable. A specie isn't just granted the gene, the genes are given out at random and the ones that favours the organism will be replicated as it will enable it survive and continue the specie.

Omudia:
you should prioritize learning English other than wasting time on an "inexistent" God.

look at this imbeçile, since when do one patronizes English is it a commodity,and tell what's wrong with what I said.

You see what the whites have done to you,is English your fathers language, instead of helping this country to wake up,your sucking a white man balls,shame on you

plaetton:


https://www.nairaland.com/1859229/ye-gods-all-all-100

In this thread, I attempted to show that microbes rule us.
They are our masters and we are their minions.

And just imagine what this one is saying

Thats an Interesting perspective justlove91.
You're also doing a good job at studying microbiology

Lennycool, great job, you've done a fantastic job of answering OP's questions without getting too technical.

OP, it you have any free time, you should check this site out:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/home.php

That is an excellent and in-depth resource on evolution and related processes.

plaetton:


https://www.nairaland.com/1859229/ye-gods-all-all-100

In this thread, I attempted to show that microbes rule us.
They are our masters and we are their minions.

I just read that post. Though its ridiculous, it has truth in it. The Human Microbiome Project in 2012 led to those findings. I think you should know that some claims made therein were scientific speculations at that time, and that's absolutely normal for novel studies. In fact, it was a paradigm shift. However, recent indept studies are confirming those claims. One major Scientist currently into Microbiome studies whom I'm following closely (even on LinkedIn) is Prof. Jack Gilbert.

You are daft, dumb and stupid. I said "prioritize", not " patronize ". It is glaringly obvious that the former is alien to you. Stop quoting me in your oblivion and learn simple English. Daft punk! [s]

GRIMMJOE:
look at this imbeçile, since when do one patronizes English is it a commodity,and tell what's wrong with what I said.

You see what the whites have done to you,is English your fathers language, instead of helping this country to wake up,your sucking a white man balls,shame on you

[/s]