The Eye: Evolution versus Creationism

Sox2 writes "SciScoop is running a story about researchers in Germany who claim to have solved the "mystery" surrounding the evolution of the mamalian eye. The work, published in Science, goes some way to answering the issues raised in the "intelligent design" debate that has become the mainstay of creationist thinking."

Comments

Mirror here

[alienfluid]

Here's the mirror

Frequently Encountered Criticisms

[vivin]

I recommend this site: http://vuletic.com/hume/cefec/ It has a bunch of commonly used creationist arguments and rebuttals to them.

Re:No, it won't

[zerblat]

Heh, you didn't read the article you linked, did you? All this shows is that people have traveled and mixed their genes. It doesn't mean that all genes originate from the same individual, only that we all have some of that person's genes.

Oh, and take another look at the Tasmania example at the end of the article.

Re:Darwin got it right...

[BWJones]

The other thing to remember is that the human eye is NOT the most advanced eye in the animal kingdom. We essentially have three channels of vision for perception of our world, red, green and blue, whereas other organisms such as many fish, turtles and birds have much more advanced retinas (and complex) that our own. For example, the turtle likely sees in at least seven channels of vision, perceiving a world we could never hope to imagine.

Oh, and here is another fact: In the zebrafish, despite their retinas being much more complex and sophisticated than ours, can repair their retinas from damage whereas we are currently screwed if our retinas go bad.

IAAVS (I am a vision scientist), and neuroscientist.