If you think this actually "proves" macro evolution, explain how you wind up with less genetic material in the end? And you also got the primary mechanism bacteria become resistant wrong, it is plasmid transference.
I don't think it's less genetic material. It's just that genes get turned off along the way, so there are fewer and fewer functioning genes. Evolution/adaptation seems to favor the turning off of genes over the turning back on. For example, one line of theropod dinosaur evolved into birds. Then when the dinosaurs-proper became extinct, leaving all sorts of unfilled niches, many species of birds essentially reoccupied the niches that their ancestors had occupied, by losing flight and gaining size, but their wings didn't grow back into functioning hands. They just became useless. That's because the genes for hands were shut off when they became wings, and it seems evolution disfavors the switching back on of genes once shut off.
