Actually, not at all like Lenski’s experiment. Lenski identified several different mutations (most of them drift) that contributed to the breakthrough ability for one of the E. Coli strains to metabolize citrate aerobically. Whereas the Japanese diet since WW2 does not seem to be correlated with any change in allele frequencies.
The definition of evolution as change in allele frequencies has already been pointed out to you. That you keep repeating the same mistakes, and refusing to engage seriously with others in the conversation, is why one of our friends in this thread has already dropped out of the conversation. Ponder that for a minute. If your goal in this forum is to shout loudly at people who disagree with you…congratulations, you have accomplished your mission. Is that your goal?
Hoping that you are more interested in engaging in a constructive conversation, I want to respond in detail to another point you raised about the Lenski experiment–to wit, that we don’t see transitions across species boundaries. Let’s consider experiments in other disciplines first to see if they can help us set appropriate expectations for a biology experiment.
Geology
Not long after Darwin proposed the theory of evolution, Alfred Wegener proposed the theory of continental drift. His theory was based on several observations:
-
The west coast of Africa and the east coast of South America appear to have been joined over 100 million years ago. (A) Fossils of the fresh water mesosaurus are found on both continents. They would have been incapable of swimming thousands of miles through the salty Atlantic Ocean. (B) The shapes of the coastlines match very closely. (C) The stratigraphy of both coasts match like adjacent pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.
-
Fossilized tropical plants were discovered in Norway.
Wegener misunderstood the mechanisms behind the drift of continents, but his basic insight is an important part of the current theory of plate tectonics.
So let’s say you’re a geologist, and you want to test the validity of plate tectonics. Could you design an experiment that directly observes two joined landmasses tear apart and drift thousands of miles apart? Obviously not, given that you do not have tens of millions of years available and they are thought to be moving at the rate of about 2 cm per year. However, you can design an experiment to test the hypothesis, based on plate tectonics, that we should observe 2 cm of motion per year. This is what NASA scientists have done with the LAGEOS satellites. It has been a (pardon the pun) smashing success.
Astrophysics
Based on the big bang theory (BBT) and the theory of relativity, should astrophysicists be able to design an experiment that observes, like a movie on a movie screen, the actual unfurling of universe from singularity to today’s vast expanse? Since we do not have 13.8 billion years, the answer is obviously not. But astrophysicists can use the foundational theories to predict phenomena such as the amount of apparent (not actual) visual correlation between relatively near galaxies and relatively distant quasars. They expect this to differ from the correlations predicted by Arp, who opposes the big bang theory. Examining the Sloan Digital Sky Survey data, astrophysicists have shown that the frequency of observed correlations agrees with the frequencies predicted by the BBT and relativity, not with the frequency predicted by Arp.
Astrophysicists can also use the BBT to predict the redshift of all but the closest galaxies. And yes, the data are consistent with the BBT.
Biology
Based on the theory of evolution, should biologists be able to design an experiment that observes a progression across a large phylogenetic distance, such as the distance from E. Coli to amoebae? Clearly not, as they don’t have the tens to hundreds of million years that would be required. However, they are able to predict the observation of evolutionary mechanisms such as drift, parallel changes, and genetic divergence in E. Coli bacteria.
Conclusion
Like geologists with plate tectonics and astrophysicists with the Big Bang, biologists are not able to directly observe 500 million years worth of change in a single population in just a few decades. But like the geologists and astrophysicists, they can use their discipline’s major theory to predict experimental observations of mechanisms and change across a more feasible time period. LAGEOS, the SDSS, and the Lenski experiment have succeeded in demonstrating how a major theory (plate tectonics, Big Bang, evolution) can yield testable predictions (landmass drift, frequency of visual correlation of galaxies with quasars, mutations and genetic drift).
Hope this helps,