The human eye as evidence for Intelligent Design
Posted: Sunday, May 16, 2010
by Joel Hendon
http://hebronics.org/index.html
We cannot use the old examples of a tornado in a junk yard creating a sophisticated computer if given 140 billion tries. The skeptics "boo" you to shame. Yet they readily accept that random chance can develop absolutely nothing into all that we see around us in the entire universe, given adequate time.
Darwin and many others who adheres (or adhered) to his wild theory have, in times past, admitted that should any part of life sustaining mechanisms prove to be irreducibly complex, the entire theory would fail. But first of all, the entire system of formation of matter, the universe, life, and so on, are far to complex to have "just happened" even if in theory each step could have occurred. And then when some mechanisms were shown to have been irreducibly complex, the dissenters threw their efforts into defeating that...and did to their own satisfaction. Darwin, himself, made this statement:
As scientists cannot determine and reproduce the beginning of life from nothing (let's give them a break and let them have inorganic matter), they also cannot give a sober answer to how, or why, the first cell became sensitive and reactive to light. Never mind the fact that they cannot tell you where the matter came from, the cell came from or the light came from.
The human eye has been an extremely complex organism to fully understand and has posed many problems for those who try so very hard to defend against irreducible complexity. Here is a quote which can give a more understandable description than I can:
The human eye is enormously complicated - a perfect and interrelated system of about 40 individual subsystems, including the retina, pupil, iris, cornea, lens and optic nerve. For instance, the retina has approximately 137 million special cells that respond to light and send messages to the brain. About 130 million of these cells look like rods and handle the black and white vision. The other seven million are cone shaped and allow us to see in color. The retina cells receive light impressions, which are translated to electric pulses and sent to the brain via the optic nerve. A special section of the brain called the visual cortex interprets the pulses to color, contrast, depth, etc., which allows us to see "pictures" of our world. Incredibly, the eye, optic nerve and visual cortex are totally separate and distinct subsystems. Yet, together, they capture, deliver and interpret up to 1.5 million pulse messages a milli-second! It would take dozens of Cray supercomputers programmed perfectly and operating together flawlessly to even get close to performing this task. (Lawrence O. Williams, "It Couldn't Just Happen" Thomas Nelson, Inc. 1989, p139-140)
Those who refuse to accept the things which are plain and obviously beyond any reasonable doubt, and not possibly a result of chance, have studied and convinced themselves that all of this complexity could have developed in steps.
Dr. Ali Demirsoy who is currently a Professor of Biological Sciences at Hacettepe University, Ankara-Turkey, with a very notable background and is a staunch advocate of evolution, makes the following admission.
How did the lens, retina, optic nerve, and all the other parts in vertebrates that play a role in seeing suddenly come about? Because natural selection cannot choose separately between the visual nerve and the retina. The emergence of the lens has no meaning in the absence of a retina. The simultaneous development of all the structures for sight is unavoidable. Since parts that develop separately cannot be used, they will both be meaningless, and also perhaps disappear with time. At the same time, their development all together requires the coming together of unimaginably small probabilities. (Dr. Ali Demirsoy, Inheritance and Evolution, Meteksan Publications, Ankara, 475)
These are just some of the innumerable questions that are allowed to be put aside with no explanation other than they know that some day the answers will come. The answer is already available to any who will read it.
This Article has been viewed 981 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (4 total)Amazing facts, Joel. Life seems utterly miraculous when you really think about it. ThanksThanks Jennifer for readind and your comment. Actually, life is miraculous. It circumvents all known natural laws. Scientists can reproduce almost anything, that nature itself can reproduce. But they cannot create life from non-living materials, even with the highly sophisticated equipment and all the known chemicals and materials.
Once again you have posed some very thought provoking questions. May your readers all be open minded and inquisitive and seeking the truth. Keep on writing - maybe the doors will open and prisoners will be set free. I am encouraged by your great efforts. (How are the kittens? Ours is growing up way too fast!)Thanks Marijo for your kind comment. We placed 3 of the 4 kittens with other people, but kept the other kitten and her mother. She is a large a normal sized cat now, but her mother is huge and I suspect she will be. When Tillie (the mother)sprawls out on the floor with a foot kindly in front of her and her tail laying straight behind her, she is over 3 feet long. I'm guessing at her weight but feeling it when I lift her, I believe she weighs around 15 pounds. That is a lot for a cat. The kitten probably weighs 6 or 7 pounds but is gaining fast.Needless to say, they are both spoiled rotten. I can't get my work done for one or both of them meowing and staring up at me wanting to be rubbed. The problem is, I almost always oblige them. And they know it. They can never replace dogs, but they come close.
I've recently read a book called "In the Blink of an Eye" about the development of the sense of sight in precambrian organisms. It was a slow process, but once it occurred there was a huge diversification of life known as the Cambrian explosion. A very enlightening read- a bit dry and over scientific. I enjoyed it, however. It answered a few questions.--Yes, Joel, I'm a very spiritual man. Friend, Jack
Evolutionists have discussed the steps involved in the gradual production of the human eye. In fact, the eye is one of the determining points that differentiates mammals from amphibians, etc..I'm no expert, but the way it is explained makes sense. Yet, I have no problem with evolution and intelligent design and do not believe that one is an argument that disproves the other. To me, evolution by natural selection is an ingenious way that our creator designed to push life onwards and upwards.An omnipotent God, all powerful, would be on the foolish side to allow a creation to form in this manner, taking billions of years. He could just as well create everything full grown and operational, which He did. The assumptions of evolution have no basis whatsoever. It is only an effort to eliminate submission to the Almighty.Thanks for reading and commenting Jennifer.But that would be quite boring, to create everything at once. But that's beside the point anyway because God didn't create everything at once, fully formed and operational.So, you don't believe the Bible...huh?I believe the Bible is not a science book. It is full of allegories, metaphors and poetry.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.