Very Good question there are a number of organisms and parts of the body that defy evolution and not even the most brilliant scientist can prove evolution for fact. That is why it to requires faith.
2007-03-19 04:08:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Hawk 2
·
1⤊
17⤋
The first step in the evolution of the eye was probably the development of light sensitive cells in some life-forms. This would have given these life-forms an advantage over others.
People, and flies only evolved many millions of years later.
Even today, there are single cell organisms like the Euglena that have light sensitive regions.
2007-03-19 04:20:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anthony Stark 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
There are many animals today that have only primitive eyes. That's how we know that other in the past also had them. There are many ways animals that get around without sight. By the time the for runners of us came around the eyes where fully developed. Nature always fin away to work things out.
2007-03-19 04:59:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by raven blackwing 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Photosensitive cells were among the earliest microbial developments; transluscent cells came a little later. Once these elements get concentrated into the DNA they don't slip out easily. They confer an advantage on species at every level of the evolutionary chain. When complex organs like the eye come to develop (and even you can see that there is a vast difference in the visual organs of insects, fish and mammals) natural selection concentrates and refines each component to enable the organism's survival.
You should read about this stuff in proper books. It sounds like you'd find it interesting and educational. So should some of these clowns who think this is a really tricky question for evolutionists to answer. I'm not even a scientist (I'm a historian of science) and I find this stuff pretty elementary. Where did you all go to school? Kansas?
2007-03-19 04:07:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bad Liberal 7
·
17⤊
1⤋
May I suggest that you read "A Short History of Almost Everything," by Bill Bryson? It is a very clear layman's account of the state of science at this point in time.
It's very informative, and lucidly written. If you are really seeking information, it will help.
If, however, you are posing what seem to you to be unanswerable question in an effort to discredit evolution, you would do well to have a more complete understanding of science, so that your questions don't appear to have been picked up at second hand from some ill-informed religious zealot with an axe to grind.
2007-03-19 04:08:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
13⤊
0⤋
Jesus, God, help us.
You cannot give an entire 10th grade biology lesson on answers. You show such a woefull lack of understanding that I hesitate to even try to answer you, but here goes.
The common primate ancestor had eyes, so humans, as a species, never had to wander around blind. Eyes evolved somewhere between amoebas and planaria.
2007-03-19 04:09:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by ZombieTrix 2012 6
·
7⤊
0⤋
The first functional 'eye' was merely a spot of photosensative cells, akin to a planaria worm's.
The next step was that these spots indented. This allows for directional detection of light (which was is the light coming from).
Next, a membrane formed over the indentation. This provides protection for the detection surface.
As a co-evolutionary step with the membrane, muscles in the area of the spot become useful for modifying the shape of the indent, allowing for changes in focus.
As the muscles that are useful adapt, they separate from the original bundles and become independant muscles. Thickening and hardening of the membrane forms a basic lens. A secondary membrane then forms over the lens to protect it from damage.
You have a simple, independant eye at this point, each step more useful than the former, and perfectly in keeping with the need for small steps.
Allow a few million years for refinement, and you have the human eye, which is hardly a pinnacle of occular evolution (lots of species totally thrash us for optic ability).
----------------
It is interesting to note -- I had not read any information specifically on the evolution of the eye. But with a grasp of the theory of evolution by natural selection, I was able to come up with a logically plausible evolutionary pathway -- which on further research is exactly what the fossil and genetic records would imply in fact happened.
Score for natural selection.
2007-03-19 04:09:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
10⤊
2⤋
Even plants are sensitive to light; they manage to bend their twigs and leaves to catch the most possible light.
That shows that sensitivity to light can already greatly help an organisms survival.
An eye will simply develop from light sensitive cells, addition of transparent protection to those cells, to the point where that protection in a certain shape can focus light better.
Any eye is a great advantage over no eye.
As to how *exactly* an eye developed; no-one was there to do the video documentary.
However, the eye has developed independantly six times, possibly more (the facet eye of insects being one of them), proving there is more than one way to do it.
2007-03-19 04:10:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by mgerben 5
·
6⤊
2⤋
The earliest eyes were simple photoreceptor spots, and they evolved from there.
This is not exactly difficult material to find, it's in Wikipedia, for crying out loud.
Only someone with a complete lack of understanding of comparative anatomy could ask such a question!
But, as you can't tell R&S from BIOLOGY, obviously, you're not batting 100% to begin with....
2007-03-19 04:09:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by LabGrrl 7
·
7⤊
1⤋
They evolved from photosensitive pigment spots.
Here's a link explaining it:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html
The hypothesis on eyes is not proven, but it is plausible, especially given the mounds of evidence for evolution in other areas. And don't tell me that 'plausible' isn't good enough, since no proof exists for the existence of God either.
2007-03-19 04:11:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by somebody 4
·
5⤊
0⤋
How can a healthy person read all of these very clear, precise and comprehensive answers here, and ignore them? You ask the question, get the answer, then put your hands over your eyes, cover your ears and rant "I can't hear youuuuu! lalalalalalalalalalala...."
2007-03-19 04:27:42
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
0⤋