The Eye Proves Creationism

[JackRT]

Do squids or octopi have binocular vision?

I have looked up photographs of both squids and octopi to see their eye placement. It looks like the squid has no binocular vision but the octopus does.

 

[Radrook]

Sorry, I read your referenced work and saw nothing to justify the claim that the inverted design is "superior" in any way. All I saw were nice descriptions about how great our vision is and how it does a great job. And that was never in contention.

The "Ï cain't see!" response again!

In other words even though the design produces great vision as you just admitted-you are still not satisfied? LOL! Maybe a good pair of binoculars permanently affixed to your skull is preferable?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The "Ï cain't see!" response again!

In other words even though the design produces great vision as you just admitted-you are still not satisfied? LOL! Maybe a good pair of binoculars permanently affixed to your skull is preferable?

You clearly don't understand that we have a theoretical mechanism for accounting for great results in spite of design "choices" that are obviously accidental in nature, such as the backwards retinal construction. Evolution accounts for that, design does not.

 

[Radrook]

You clearly don't understand that we have a theoretical mechanism for accounting for great results in spite of design "choices" that are obviously accidental in nature, such as the backwards retinal construction. Evolution accounts for that, design does not.

The evolution explanation for it is?
If the organism has it it's because it must have given it a survival advantage.
But that goes against your whole argument that it was inferior design doesn't it?
And of course if it is inferior design then the organism should not have retained it under the evolution scheme via natural selection. Yet since it does have it it must provide survival advantages of course. But that goes against your whole other view that the blind spot is a creation awkward mistake doesn't it? But if it isn't an awkward mistake then you can't condemn the creation view as unfeasible-right? But since it provides great vision..... ad infinitum.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The evolution explanation for it is?
If the organism has it it's because it must have given it a survival advantage.
But that goes against your whole argument that it was inferior design doesn't it?
And of course if it is inferior design then the organism should not have retained it under the evolution scheme via natural selection. Yet since it does have it it must provide survival advantages of course. But that goes against your whole other view that the blind spot is a creation awkward mistake doesn't it? But if it isn't an awkward mistake then you can't condemn the creation view as unfeasible-right? But since it provides great vision..... ad infinitum.

Nice try, but verbal quibbling like that does not actually constitute a valid argument.

Many times evolution starts with something that barely works and refines it over many generations, and eyes is one of those things. In fact, there are examples of partially working eyes at every level, and the poorest of them from our point of view suit their owners well enough. There is another example of poor design in our eyes that we don't normally think about . . . the need to change the shape of our lens to focus at various distances. If only our lens could just move back and forth, instead of change shape, then it wouldn't lose the ability to focus starting at age 40. But the animal ancestry that evolved our eyes didn't normally have to worry about living that long.

 

[scottyp588]