(August 30, 2012 at 4:27 pm)Undeceived Wrote: Here's a picture of the main parts of an eye: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VkKryzGZM1c/UB...+eye+1.jpg
The prior stage should have a change in only one of the parts, and the eye should still function. If more than one part changes, we have an evolutionary leap and the probability shrinks by thousandths. There should be points along the path where vital parts such as the retina, lens and iris can safely mutate and leave the eye still operative, lessening the quality by just a fraction.
If you're this curious, why don't you go educate yourself about evolutionary biology? If you buy the argument at a genetic level--which is really "where" the evolution occurs--then issues like "the irreducible complexity of the eye" shouldn't bother you, since the development of the eye is genetic.
Does that make sense?
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Catholic, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”
