Duncan Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 I was talking earlier to a Optometrist friend of mine and he was saying how wonderful the human eyeball was and I would agree it is but yet I wear glasses mine weren't designed so well. I have terrible eyesight and would be a bumbling maniac stumbling everywhere without them. So if eyes were so well designed why do we wear glasses and have all these vision problems? both of my parents wear glasses but me father got his because of a youthful accident so bad eyesight comes through my Mum
Mariner Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 Turns out that the human eye, along with that of other mammals, if it was designed at all, was actually "designed" backwards. In the human eye, light must pass through a thin layer of nerve fibers before actually impacting the rod and cone photoreceptors of the retina. Among other disadvantages, this "design" or structure results in a blind spot in mammals (in fact in all vertebrates).The Almighty apparently conferred his best eye design on the cephalopods (most notably the octopus), in which the nerve fibers run behind the retina (instead of between the retina and the light source) and in which there is no blind spot and no scattering of focused of light by nerve fibers.Intelligent Design indeed. 2
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 (edited) I was talking earlier to a Optometrist friend of mine and he was saying how wonderful the human eyeball was and I would agree it is but yet I wear glasses mine weren't designed so well. I have terrible eyesight and would be a bumbling maniac stumbling everywhere without them. So if eyes were so well designed why do we wear glasses and have all these vision problems? both of my parents wear glasses but me father got his because of a youthful accident so bad eyesight comes through my MumI hate them but cannot see because I am just old. Thankfully being older lets me see more than just the visual. Edited April 17, 2012 by Bill “Papa” Lee
thesometimesaint Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 We live in an imperfect world.BTW Our eye constantly shifts to compensate for the blind spot.
altersteve Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 It's all Eve's fault. If she hadn't eaten that apple... 2
Duncan Posted April 17, 2012 Author Posted April 17, 2012 just so everyone is aware I got 59% in grade 10 science so please make responses dummy proof!
thesometimesaint Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 I took biology in my 10th grade science class. IIRC, that was a LONG time ago, I got a "B". Didn't care all that much for the smell of formaldehyde.
blackstrap Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 A few ( very few ) mutations are helpful.Most are not.Some are deadly. As the scriptures say " who hath sinned,this man or his fathers? 1
Log Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 (edited) Turns out that the human eye, along with that of other mammals, if it was designed at all, was actually "designed" backwards. In the human eye, light must pass through a thin layer of nerve fibers before actually impacting the rod and cone photoreceptors of the retina. Among other disadvantages, this "design" or structure results in a blind spot in mammals (in fact in all vertebrates).The Almighty apparently conferred his best eye design on the cephalopods (most notably the octopus), in which the nerve fibers run behind the retina (instead of between the retina and the light source) and in which there is no blind spot and no scattering of focused of light by nerve fibers.Intelligent Design indeed.Intelligent action does not imply optimal action, even if someone does get beyond merely asserting the suboptimality of the mammalian eye. Edited April 17, 2012 by Log
thesometimesaint Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 blackstrap:Most mutations are neutral; some are deadly; some render the individual sterile; and few provide an advantage to the individual, but are not passed on; and a few get passed on that provide a population with an advanttage.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 It's all Eve's fault. If she hadn't eaten that apple...Women can't live with them...and don't want to without them.
Mariner Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 (edited) Intelligent action does not imply optimal action, even if someone does get beyond merely asserting the suboptimality of the mammalian eye.That is one way to look at the issue, I guess. Another way to look at it is that the Almighty thought more of his octopus than he did his humans.The real answer of course, is that the two eye forms evolved in different ways (and probably several times). Since both worked sufficiently well, they were both selected for and retained. Edited April 17, 2012 by Mariner
Log Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 The real answer of course, is that the two eye forms evolved in different ways (and probably several times). Since both worked sufficiently well, they were both selected for and retained.Another assertion made without evidence, and, accordingly, rejected without evidence.
thesometimesaint Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 (edited) Mariner:Or just maybe God thought that man would live a lot longer on land than in the ocean. Edited April 17, 2012 by thesometimesaint
Mariner Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 Another assertion made without evidence, and, accordingly, rejected without evidence.What do you mean, "made without evidence"? There is evidence for eye evolution up and down pretty much the entire the phylogenetic scale. If you are not aware of this evidence, then I suggest you do some research on the subject before simply asserting magic.
Mariner Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 Mariner:Or just maybe God thought that man would live a lot longer on land than in the ocean.Maybe.
thesometimesaint Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 Log:http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topicbrowse2.php?topic_id=46
Mariner Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 Log:http://evolution.ber...php?topic_id=46There are also any number of videos on the subject, and there is also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye
thesometimesaint Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 altersteve:Truth is truth no matter where we find it.Brigham Young
cinepro Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 Wikipedia, Mariner? Really?One of the things I loved about the 2000's was how, when someone referenced "Wikipedia" for something that you didn't want to believe, you could just say "but that's Wikipedia" as if everything on it was made up. It makes me long for the days when I looked forward to Star Wars Episode III and future seasons of Lost.
Calm Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 It's all Eve's fault. If she hadn't eaten that apple...And here I thought an apple a day kept the doctor away.....
Calm Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 That was Persephone and gave us the seasons of winter and summer.
altersteve Posted April 17, 2012 Posted April 17, 2012 altersteve:Truth is truth no matter where we find it.Brigham YoungI completely agree. I just thought it was strange for him to cite Wikipedia instead of a "peer-reviewed scientific article."
Recommended Posts