Video on the evolution of the eye!

[Will]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOtP7HEuDYA

Each evolutionary step is independently an advantage for the organism on which it develops, thus verifying the development of the eye as a function of evolution. I hope people will link this video in the future for those who may not understand that the "complexity of the eye can't be explained" argument is outdated and is not correct.

Enjoy science!  

[Moses]

That is a great video!

I never understood the argument from intelligent design against the eye. I have never really studied it in depth but the summarized arguments seem odd to me. Did they honestly think the eye just popped into existence without going through a trial phase to develop?

[Will]

I think they think that god did it.  

[SteveS]

Sweet video!

For the Dawkins fans, here's two of his videos that go through the stages including a working model built along the way:

Part I:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUOpaFVgKPw
Part II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sb2fjftZrkE

[jrosebud]

Thanks for the video, Will!

[rlrose328]

Thanks for that video link... I've "favorited" it for future reference, posting and forwarding.  

[Promethium147]

A note on the origin of the Creationist "argument" regarding the evolution of the eye...

This is taken (cherrypicked) directly from Darwin's Origin of Species, when he remarks (quite rhetorically) that he can't imagine how something as complex as the eye might evolve.

He then Immediately goes on to say "ah BUT, if we break it down...", and even diagrams stages of eye development - which have long since been observed in nature; thus his cold speculations were remarkably accurate.

I have even been assailed with the "fact" that Darwin recanted on his deathbed, and accepted Christ. Gimme a break.

This is akin to the argument that evolution defies the second law of thermodynamics (and every other "argument" they have.) They actually throw away the first clause of the second law to do this (cherrypicking most precise) and then assert that entropy means "disorder", which only reveals that - they don't even know what "heat" means. This is all a means of generating an air of intellectualism, conceived by the deeply anti-intellectual.

It is not argument, for argument requires honesty. it is merely structured lying, a discipline of Not Thinking. To Feel is Good - and Thinking just gets in their way.

 

[Chimera]

Great video, Will

[Jolly Sapper]

If the human eye is too complex to have evolved into the form we have today and could only have poofed into existence by supernatural means, then why does a child born blind have eyes at all?  If the human eye is too complex to have evolved piecemeal to function as it an eye does, then how can a human eye form at all if any part of it is non-functional?

I've wondered if this argument would carry any weight in a creation/evolution debate.  I'm not sure if I've read this somewhere or it just sprung from my brain meats but if anybody who spends more time on the boards of "the other side" feel free to use it and give me a link to the thread or something.

[Promethium147]

If the human eye is too complex to have evolved into the form we have today and could only have poofed into existence by supernatural means, then why does a child born blind have eyes at all?

Some possible answers -

1) Jesus needs people to put the healin' on. That's what cripples are there for (I have heard this repeatedly - in dead earnest!)
2) For the same reason so many species that have become isolated in dark caves or the deepest seas retain fully formed, but nonfunctional eyes.

If the human eye is too complex to have evolved piecemeal to function as it an eye does, then how can a human eye form at all if any part of it is non-functional?

1) See above.
2) If you have a defect in your sight, you cannot approach the Altar of God. The Bible tells me so. I never go to church because - I wear glasses (and fear thunderbolts.)

I've wondered if this argument would carry any weight in a creation/evolution debate.  I'm not sure if I've read this somewhere or it just sprung from my brain meats but if anybody who spends more time on the boards of "the other side" feel free to use it and give me a link to the thread or something.

Frankly, I have seen many a floorshow of this sort BILLED as debate, but Debate never actually happens. Fundies cheat at everything because - that's the only way they know to win a cookie. Thieves, not honest laborers.

Oh yes, this argument has been made many times - and never, ever addressed honestly and directly. The weight of it is excellent - but by logical standards, mind you.