3/7/2009
This comes up often: Evolution can't explain the eye.
Seriously? Trained biologists aren't able to figure this one out? Seems pretty logical to me.
There are, right now, animals (worms and such) which have photo-sensitive nerve clusters. This is where the eye starts. Those who have these clusters protected by a thin layer of cells have an advantage. The covering grows more transparent, and therefore may grow thicker--the lens starts. With the added thickness of the lens, the nerve cluster--the newly-forming retina--can recede for more protection. Musculature in the face grows around the lens.... From there it's all just a matter of refinement.
Is it amazing? Yes.
But it's hardly "unexplainable" in evolutionary terms.







March 27th, 2009 at 16:59
Better yet, the eye evolved no less then 40 (!) times, independently. This is amazing.
A great explanation can be found in a dedicated chapter in "Climbing mount improbable" by Richard Dawkins.
May 2nd, 2009 at 11:52
Hey... Sorry for the horrendous delay in approving this comment. It got buried in a ton of Russian spam, and I missed it. I'll have to put that book on my reading list (maybe I'll actually get around to reading some of these books once I retire... assuming I'm ever able to retire).