How can evolution account for an eye?

Question

There are over 8700 chemical reactions which have to occur in sequence for an eye to "see". Take out any one of them and sight is impossible. There is no half (or one quarter) way to see. It is all or nothing.

So how can evolution explan eye sight?

Answer 1

Well, the arguement is that random action can't possibly account for it. But in an infinite universe with an infinite amount of time, every possible event (no matter how random) occurs. Perhaps the big bang has happened billions of times before, and this is one of many permutations, and this is just the first time that a highly unlikely series of events has created the human eye. Moreover, it could be that evolution is not completely random, but that certain evolutionary paths are encoded into the evolutionary process, and that only certain permutations from that can be created. However, that really only explains how we evolved from bacteria, it doesn't explain how bacteria have such complex evolutionary paths involved in them. Still, the "Infinite time infinite possibilities" approach, while complex, does still hold up. It just doesn't make evolution as "the undeniable truth!" too much easier.

... also, what the heck? Why the hell is the human eye supposed to be so complex? Complex in comparison to what? Einstein said that "Everything should be as simple as possible... and no simpler." Maybe the rest of evolution was just really really simple, because it didn't have to be anymore complex. Maybe incredible chance isn't even a problem for macro evolution.

Answer 2

Wow. what a surprise. Another idiot who doesn't know how evolution works. It's quite simple. Each of those reactions were built up from smaller reactions, lesser particles, until they became the eye we know today. And the eye is STILL poorly designed!

Many biological structures are obviously "jury-rigged", ie- they are trial and error modifications upon pre-existing structures which don't work very well in their current application. We can see this in both their structural similarity to those structures (ie- the homology argument), and the fact that they are pretty damned bad designs. For example, the human eye's photoreceptors are backwards (the nerve fibers are on the side facing the incoming light), which means that the "wiring" gets in the way and reduces our visual acuity! Worse yet, there is a hole where the fibers exit the eye, which creates a blind spot! Squids and octopi don't have this problem, but we (and all vertebrates) inherited this flaw from our ancestors. Similarly, we swallow and breathe through the same tube, which creates a choking hazard that can easily be fatal. Once again, this is easily explained by examining our evolutionary ancestors, but it is absolutely incomprehensible for an "intelligent designer".

Answer 3

Actually, I have an article buried some where in my library from Scientific American about the evolution of the eye. A simple web search will come up with a few hits like this one: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html

Just because something is complex doesn't mean it didn't come from something simpler. Take a look at the evolution of the car. If you took out the fuel injection system, it wouldn't work. But the Model T had no fuel injection system.

Complexity is not proof that evolution doesn't exist. In fact, complexity is the EXPECTED result of evolution.

Answer 4

If you're going to use this argument, don't use the eye, especially not the human eye. If eyes were the perfectly designed thing that you're making them out to be, none of us would need glasses; and we can only see in so many wavelengths/dimensions (some birds of prey can see into the ultraviolet spectrum, and it has been speculated that bees can see in six dimensions). How would evolution explain something so complex? Time. Lots and lots of time, which ONLY evolution allows for.

Personally, if I were going to make this argument, I would use the human brain, which is far more complex than the eye will ever be.

Answer 5

Do you really think that evolutionists will simply roll over and quit as a result of your little "zinger"?

Please.

Darwin pondered the same question, and came to the conclusion that it could (despite creationists taking his quote out of context). Modern scientists have reached the similar conclusion. Your query is neither unique nor interesting.

Please quite simply regurgitating your pastors sunday sermons on science. Instead, read actual science and learn what actual scientists believe. Caution, it is complicated and it does require you to think, so beware. If you can't think critically and understand broad concepts, it may be best not to wade into the water and just be happy with you same ignorant self.

BTW, the human eye is actually very poorly made. Squid eyes are much better.

Answer 6

This is an old and outdated criticism of evolution theory. The evolution of sight organs is now better understood and persuasively proven. If you really wanted to know (instead of trying to overthrow millions of pieces of evidence with one simplistic question, like a pompous ignoramus), you could research the question and learn the real answer. I will not bother to describe it for you, though, because you clearly are here to try to make a point, not to ask a question to which you really want an answer.

Answer 7

You don't want to consider the eye as it is today because of how complex it is... Through evolution, the eye would have formed through the enhancement of even the most basic of sensory organs. Through millions of years with even the slightest of enhancement with every few generations, this could possibly account for the complexity an eye.

I am neither for creation or evolution, but I speak theoretically.

Answer 8

The billion+ years of trial and error of evolution is actually the PERFECT explanation for something so complex. By the way ... the eye is nothing compared to the complexity of the human brain.

Answer 9

You're being MYOPIC in your assumption.
That's simply not true. Obviously you don't know much about eye diseases or imparements.

Moles still have eyes, but they're mostly blind. They live underground and really have limited use of them. Through the ages their vision need and capability has decresed steadily. Evenutally...THROUGH EVOLUTION I'm sure they'll loose their eyes altogether...just as many species of sea creatures who have no eyes at all!

Answer 10

Well, its not really all or nothing. Many people can't see very well and there are degrees of sight. I understand your point though. Its complicated. So many things in the body that we take for granted are almost miraculous. One wrong pair of amino acids and poof, you don't get made.