Apostate Kate:
This is not evidence of evolution at all
Yes it is. It's clear, unequivocal evidence of evolution. You could hardly ask for better evidence.
but adaptation, there is an enormous difference between the two.
Not really.
Adaptation occues naturally in nature and can be seen in everyday life.
We can see that species are adapted to their environment but we rarely see something actually adapting. Such changes are usually only noticeable over many generations.
My chihuahua is an adaptation of a wolf.
True, but one artificially rather than naturally selected
The DNA for lactose tolerance or intollerance is in the human body and can be turned off or on,
Not exactly. There are genes for producing the enzyme lactase, which in many populations "switches off" after a certain age. It was already known that Europeans have a particular mutation that causes it to stay switched on. This latest study has shown that there are at least three other mutations which have had the same effect for the same reasons. The effect is the same but the route taken to get there was different. This is not just a case of a gene being switched on or off. This is evolution by natural selection.
but then gene is there. Missing genes cause often fatal flaws such as Downs Syndrome, Marfans, Cystic Fibrosis, cancers, Sickel Cell Anemia, there have been thousands mapped.
None of those conditions is caused by "missing genes".
Every species has DNA code that is as if written in stone.
No, it's not like it's written in stone. Not at all. It's more like a code written in sugar.
Adaptations can take place but there is not nor ever has been any evidence that my chihuahua could ever adapt into an entire other species.
I don't think anyone has ever suggested that an individual could become a new species, but speciation of populations is an observed fact.
Mutations show no gain in genetic information.
Not true at all.
Genetic information can be "activated" for this lactose intolerance, but again, no new genetic material was found.
Again not true.
I'm not a higly intelligent person
You don't need to be. Someone of average intelligence should be able to understand this. Something other than lack of intelligence is responsible for you not getting it.
but I stand behind the Second Law of Thermodyanics and Entropy.
As do I. Any theory that contradicts the second law of thermodynamics is flat-out wrong. No ifs, no buts.
No one yet has been able to apply the evolution theory, (not adaptation) to those laws of physics in a way that makes sense.
To you, perhaps. But to the vast majority of the educated world there's absolutely no contradiction. Now they could - biologists, geologists, paleontologists, chemists, physicists - all be wrong, but if they are they are hugely, massively and unforgivably wrong. All of them. So either they, the cognoscenti, the professional scientists, the great minds of our generation, don't understand a very simple fundamental piece of science, or you don't.
Having a genetic disease caused me to research this in depth and I keep an open mind.
You don't seem to have done much research on this at all. You don't even seem to have read the original article very thoroughly. And your mind doesn't seem to be open. Despite the overwhelming evidence for evolution, you choose not to believe in it, even when you read (or at least skim) an article that provides strong evidence for a particular case of natural selection.