RE: The Argument From Design
August 3, 2011 at 5:13 pm
(This post was last modified: August 3, 2011 at 5:40 pm by Anomalocaris.)
(August 3, 2011 at 3:31 pm)Godschild Wrote: Cop-out, none of you can explain it and Dawkins is a rambling nut job. Dawkins never explained the optic nerve nor the development of the part of the brain responsible for sight, nothing about how the image is inverted.
And you or your bible can????? You have any idea what optical nerve really is and how it is configured? You have any idea how optical nerve enters the optical papilla in the back of your eye and spreads out to forms a opaque and shadow forming net of ganglion cells in front of the light sensing rods and cones of your retina? Do you know that the light sensing rod and cone cells of your retina, which you squander so often forcing it to form images of words you imagine to be from some sky man that gave you the retina, is actually obscured by 5 different layers of tissues between it and the incoming light ??????
Do you freaking know how terrible the human retina and optical nerve is designed from engineering perspective? It's like a digital camera whose circuits are located in front of the CCD that captures light, so as to ensure every image it sees is partially blocked, obscured and distorted.
Do you still like to credit this disgraceful kluge of an eye you use to read the bible to some omniscient omnipotence? Perhaps god in his great goodness, just hates you.
Can it be better engineered? Sure it can. Every camera is better engineered. The god damned squid is better engineered. Appearently god can, but not for you. Squid has a much better eye than we. Its optical ganglion net actually enters the retina from behind, so as to not block the light reaching the rods and cones in its eyes. It actually has an proper optical instrument for an eye. A squid is never known to pray. A squid is never known to praise Jesus. A squid squirts black ink at the sight of approaching bible. Yet god love the squid more than you. Poor Godschild.
As to those things you ask us to explain, as matter of fact we can, and Dawkins, far more surely even than the fact that you will wimper back to your bible whenever reality threaten to intrude, also can. But it's not his job, nor to his profit, nor is it ours nor to our profit, to squander time trying to enlighten the type of unenlightenable biblical ignorance such as yours. If you want to find out, if you would like to demonstrate that we underestimatre you and you are in fact enlightenable, then it's up to your to stop squandering time reading the bible and start using it instead to find out exact how far we've gone past it. Ditch your bible first, and then we might help you a little to find out what had been possible without it, and how much of what it promised is utter bullshit.
Oh, while you might, but probably will not, be pondering this, have you looked up the construction of the pin hole eye of squid's nautilus relatives, like I asked you several posts back, in an honest endeavor to find out just how something like your eye could have evolve?
