80 posts / 0 new
Last post
ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture

Think of this as part two of my Evolution of the Eye thread. There are several obstacles that are encountered if the eye evolved gradually. I want to focus on two.

1. The lens and pinhole: A flat sheet of photoreceptors sees a completely different image than a concave one with a pinhole opening. Blurriness is an obvious factor, but I want to focus on direction. A flat sheet sees light and shadows almost like a mirror reflection of the source. However, a light passing through a pinhole becomes inverted. A shadow that was seen on the left of a flat sheet, is now seen at the right. This means the world literally flips upside down. Without a brain already capable of understanding the new retinal image, the animal that was used to turning left when they saw shadow at the right, now turns right and into the mouth of a predator.

2. Multiple eyes: Hardly anyone mentions the evolution of a second eye, they only focus on the evolution of a single eye. This a problem, because the moment a second eye emerges, the image is once again thrown into chaos. Giving rise to the problem of correspondence. How does the image of one eye match the image of the other.

How do you think these problems were solved?

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

chimp3's picture
Your question beg of design

Your question begs of design and intent.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Both of which need to be

Both of which need to be accounted for by evolution. So how do you account for them?

chimp3's picture
No need to account for design

No need to account for design or intent.

Sheldon's picture
chimp3 "Your question begs of

chimp3 "Your question begs of design and intent."

theist Breezy "Both of which need to be accounted for by evolution."

No they don't, you simply don't understand evolution at all.

Nyarlathotep's picture
John 6IX Breezy - How does

John 6IX Breezy - How does the image of one eye match the image of the other.

Why would you think they match?

LostLocke's picture
And the fact that they don't

And the fact that they don't match is the reason we have stereoscopic vision.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Without a doubt the disparity

Without a doubt the disparity provides depth cues. But the question is how did that evolve? At any given moment the image on the left retina looks nothing like the image of the right, not even close. The world out there is full of thousands of objects with different colors, most of which are moving on their own, all of which are moving as your head moves. Some of this objects are partially occluded, so that only one eye can see them but the other can't. To your left eye, the tip of your nose is to the right of your computer; but to your right eye, your nose is on the left. The brain has to take all these disparities and make sense out of them.

How did the mechanism that gave us stereoscopic vision evolve? Did it evolve before two eyes evolved? Did it evolve after?

LostLocke's picture
Two slightly displaced eyes

Two slightly displaced eyes are the mechanism that give us depth perception. If both your eyes saw the same thing you would not see depth.
Either I don't understand your question, or your question doesn't make sense.

CyberLN's picture
I gotta fess up...sometimes I

I gotta fess up...sometimes I wonder, John, if you ask these very detailed questions about evolutionary biology in a forum of non-evolutionary biologists as a means of tripping someone into a "gotcha" situation. Because, really, this sort of detail is absolutely available to you via resources produced by professionals. Yet you continue to escalate the complexity of your questions here.

LostLocke's picture
Just a heads up, he basically

Just a heads up, he basically admitted in another thread that's exactly what he's doing. He's not really interested in answers, he just wants us to get to a point where we say "I don't know" so that he can jump up and go "Aha!".

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I am interested in the answer

I am interested in the answer. I just don't think you guys have any. I think you guys blindly follow evolution without actually knowing anything about it. I think most atheists just read a Dawkins book and pat themselves on the back. None of this matters however, because what I think doesn't stop you from giving me an answer. The "gotcha" doesn't come when you answer. The "gotcha" comes when you don't lol.

Now to clarify. Have you ever had double vision? If you have, then this illustrates the way you should be seeing the world at all times. The reason you don't is because you have a brain that stiches everything together, to give you a single image that has depth. The brain can't just superimpose both images, because they are not exact copies of each other. The brain also can't just superimpose their mirror images, because the images are not a reflection of each other.

Now, I already now how the brain does all this. So I'm not interested in how it works in us. I'm interested it how you believe it arose through evolution. I know you guys never have evidence, so I'm open to your theories and guesses.

mykcob4's picture
Really John Breezy? And I

Really John Breezy? And I thought that YOu were reasonable. I guess I was wrong. Way to confirm every cliche about christians!

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I am reasonable, but we are

I am reasonable, but we are on opposing sides here. You think I'm wrong, and I think you're wrong. I don't see what's unreasonable about that. In fact, I've taken this new approach because you and a few others keep throwing around the word evidence, as if it was on your side.

If its on your side show me by answering my questions. Its so simple. They are not trick questions. They are questions I don't think you have answers and evidence for.

These are also not trivial questions. These are serious problems. If an animal doesn't find a solution to them, they'll probably die.

mykcob4's picture
No, John, You are trying to

No, John, You are trying to poke holes in evolution, who knows why. You'd have to discredit DNA to do it. Simply demanding a cause for one evolutionary trait isn't a plausible or even a reasonable quest.
Word evidence? If you wanted a scientific breakdown you should have gone to a source that would provide that, of course, you'd have to have a better-constructed sentence and relinquish your agenda first.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I'm trying to expose holes,

I'm trying to expose holes, not poke them. And sure, next time I'll go the priests and apologists of the atheistic religion, since the laypeople don't have answers.

Burn Your Bible's picture
Define your god!

Define your god!

Nyarlathotep's picture
First you tell us they match,

First you tell us they match, then you tell us they aren't even close. And of course, neither of those statements are correct.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
The retinal image on the eyes

The retinal image on the eyes do not match. Your brain has to make them match. My question is how did that evolve?

LostLocke's picture
How they evolved is a

How they evolved is a question for a biologist.
If you have a problem with your heart you go to a cardiologist. What you're doing is going to a podiatrist, then poking fun at him for not having exact details about how your heart works.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
How on earth am I supposed to

How on earth am I supposed to know which questions you are not educated enough to answer?

LostLocke's picture
You might find a podiatrist

You might find a podiatrist that is very well educated on the heart. But instead of running to different podiatrists hoping you find one that has heart knowledge, wouldn't it be much more logical to just go to a cardiologist right off the bat?

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Its one thing for you to not

Its one thing for you to not know the answer. Quiet another to appeal to authority.

Sheldon's picture
theist Breezy "The retinal

theist Breezy "The retinal image on the eyes do not match. Your brain has to make them match. My question is how did that evolve?"

"Researchers in the laboratories of Detlev Arendt and Jochen Wittbrodt have discovered that the light-sensitive cells of our eyes, the rods and cones, are of unexpected evolutionary origin – they come from an ancient population of light-sensitive cells that were initially located in the brain."


Flamenca's picture
@Breezy, you didn't tell if

@Breezy, you didn't tell if what @Sheldon provided makes any difference to you...

I think you totally missed the point. As far as I'm concerned, any atheist here has ever claimed to have every answer to every question. I suggest you choose a random Christian forum and post the same OPs you're used to writing about Evolution, and see what happens. Despite our lack of Biology Phd's -as you requested- I bet in this forum you'll find more accurate answers about Evolution by far.

Science may have not all the answers yet, but it's so on its way... Creationism may have its days numbered.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
No, it makes no difference.

No, it makes no difference. What he posted is irrelevant to my question. Not to mentioned already stated by me elsewhere.


Attach Image/Video?: 

Sheldon's picture
That's irrelevant, as it's

That's irrelevant, as it's just an attempt at evasion. Your grasp of evolution is also execrable, so the answer would be wasted on you anyway, as you have showed repeatedly. Your monkey question was a low point IMHO, and that was some achievement given your performance elsewhere. .

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Ironically, my monkey

Ironically, my monkey question had a very specific purpose. Based on your response here and there, I'd say my purpose was fulfilled to my satisfaction.

Sheldon's picture
It certainly satisfied any

It certainly satisfied any lingering doubts I had about your grasp of evolution.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
That's the irony lol.

That's the irony lol.

Burn Your Bible's picture
Why do you think evolution is

Why do you think evolution is a ladder ?


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.