If evolution is false, how do we explain bacteria which has grown resistant to antibiotics?

• Picture this. You've just discovered pencillin, a wonder drug derived from fungus among us. In your enthusiasm as newest superhero to the world, you begin distributing the drug worldwide to cure all manner of bacterial infections. Things are fine for a few years. Only a few people suffer anaphylactic shock and die from the drug itself, but the majority see their infections gradually dissipate. More time passes. Sporadic reports come in about people with infections which are slow to heal or aren't healing at all in response to pencillin. OMGWTF, you utter in the early 1900s equivalent dialect. The people suffering these infections are from the same region of the U.S., haven't travelled abroad. The infection itself exhibits similar characteristics aside from its seeming immunity to penicillin. You gather up cultures of the bacteria from these oddball cases, then place them in petri dishes side-by-side with "standard" bacteria, then expose both to an equal dose of penicillin. Chillingly, the former happily continues to reproduce without regard to the penicillin, while the ordinary bacteria is decimated. If evolution doesn't happen, how do we explain the survivability of these newer bacteria against a drug that destroyed their predecessors?

• Answer:

  We can't. No One Can, Without the Intervention of "Magic". EDIT: of Interest: [Not Beta-Lactam Resistance, Mediated By a Plasmid.] Clear Evidence of Mutation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ames_test