Argument #3: Mutations

[JesusHChrist]

If genetic changes never provide increased "functionality", how do you explain this:

It has the menacing sound of an Alfred Hitchcock movie: Millions of rats aren't even getting sick from pesticide doses that once killed them. In one county in England, these "super rats" have built up such resistance to certain toxins that they can consume five times as much poison as rats in other counties before dying. From insect larvae that keep munching on pesticide-laden cotton in the U.S. to head lice that won't wash out of children's hair, pests are slowly developing genetic shields that enable them to survive whatever poisons humans give them.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/librar...01_02.html

I would suggest, numerous examples of multiple organisms, from bacteria, to insects, to mammals, developing genetic shields to protect the species against previously harmful environment factors blows your nonsense out of the water.

Perhaps you've heard certain bacteria have become virtually immune to anti-biotics? From the bacteria species' perspective, definitely a gain in functionality.

Mutation

Mutation is a change in the DNA that can sometimes cause a change in the gene product, which is the target of the antimicrobial.

When a susceptible bacterium comes into contact with a therapeutic concentration of antimicrobials, like fluroquinolones, the antimicrobial can bind to the specific enzymes, in this case, DNA gyrase. The DNA gyrase is an essential bacterial enzyme required for DNA replication. The end result is that fluoroquinolones block bacterial DNA replication leading to cell death. However, when spontaneous mutations occur in specific areas of the genes encoding these enzymes, antimicrobials no longer bind efficiently. This allows the bacterium to continue DNA replication.

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/Safe...134455.htm

Notice the words "spontaneous mutations"...

There are many other examples, but these should be sufficient to prove the point.