Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)

[Pat Mustard]

You do realise, idiot, that the "what good is half an eye?" argument was debunked by Darwin himself.  We actually have a pretty good handle on how and why eyes have evolved and continue to evolve amongst animal species.  It's not actually hard to figure out that something which gives you a huge advantage to start with and improved that advantage at each stage it improved has come to be.

The issue with sensory organs is that they are there to inform or guide behavior. Given that perception is a highly interpretive process, possessing "half an eye" as you call it, will most likely lead to behaviors that are disadvantageous.

Half an eye is better than no eye, idiot.

For example, worms with patches of skin that distinguish what direction the sun is shining from do better than those without. They know when they've hit the surface of the soil for one thing, and can burrow themselves back into the ground. This is a classic example of half an eye being better than no eye.

To quote Darwin:

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.

Now go back to AIG and wallow with your fellow cretinists, or learn what evolution actually is. Stop bothering us with your nonsense.