The Missing Link and the Irreducible Complexity of the Eye

[Mister Agenda]

I'd suggest you look up "scaffolding". No mutation exists in a vacuum. Their environment is not only the outer world, but the genetic environment the mutations arise in. A light-sensitive cell arises in a brainless animal? You might have a point. It arises in an animal which has a brain? The possibility of processing exists. If it can and does, then you've got a whole 'nother ball of wax.

More creationist binary thinking on display here.

Yes, if: a cell becomes photosensitive through a copying error; the cell is hooked by nerves to a brain; and, the brain by chance directs useful behavior based on the information from the cell, then you have something. Needing all those things is why it's irreducibly complex. You could have a photosensitive cell on your elbow right now. It wouldn't change a thing, because your brain isn't wired to process input from your elbow visually. If the evolutionary view is true we should have eyes on the back of our heads or in other places.

'Irreducibly complex' is a claim. You can't stop there. It's not a synonym for 'I find this unlikely'. Unlikely things happen all the time. Why shouldn't a cell that already has a nerve connecting it to a brain have a mutation that makes it photosensitive?

And if you think evolution calls for eyes on the back of our heads or on our elbows, you've missed very important parts of the theory entirely and are currently incapable of making true claims about what evolution entails except by chance.

---

But mutations do not have to happen in isolation, one after the other, there are many different mutations in the entire population and any could help the development of whatever directly or indirectly and come together as the population breeds. There are currently 7,000,000,000 humans mutating and breeding and apparently evolution has sped up as a result. our brains have shrunk rather alarmingly for one thing.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...ution.html

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep/25-...-shrinking

I guess that rules out the Tomorrow People. Our future is Idiocracy. Sounds about right.

If it's any consolation, smaller doesn't necessarily mean stupider, up to a point.