The real alternative to design (Evolution)

by David Turell , Thursday, March 06, 2008, 23:17 (6104 days ago) @ kylie2002

Kylie 2002 has stumbled into the same trap that is used by most defenders of pure Neo-Darwinism. The human eye is 'imperfect' and no "God" would have created it the way it looks. What is being discussed is the human retina which is put in backwards, the vessels and the nerves on the surface facing the pupil and the receptor cells in back. Artistically I agree, it looks wrong. One would think the retina should have the receptors in front and the vessels and nerves in back, like in the octopus eye. But perfect artistic design may not be the best functional design. The receptors require a high level of energy and nutrients, and it has been shown that the backwards arrangement provides that need. Yes, our eyes have a blind spot where the optic nerves come to the surface. Have you ever seen it? Of course not. We don't see the vessels either, but their shadows can be seen with trick lighting (which I don't want to spend the time describing, but I've seen mine.) So what!! Optimal functional design is alot more reasonable than perfect artistic design. Dawkins is a scientifically poorly educated author and it shows in all his work.