One of the many blessings we have that often goes overlooked is simply being able to see. Most of us with good vision take for granted opening our eyes and seeing everything from light rays pouring in through our bedroom windows in the morning to that delightful morning espresso with perfect crema shared with our spouse with terrible bed head. Yet in our western society, there seems to be an evolutionary push by naturalists that can mislead the public into thinking that eyes are really not that special, after all, we needed to invent spectacles, microscopes and telescopes, didn’t we? Perhaps by opening our eyes a little bit wider, they will lead us towards a designer.
Human eyesight is very complicated and please excuse the pun but we’d be blind not to see it! We can see up as up, down as down, right as right and left as left. However, when light enters the eye and passes through the lens, the image that is projected onto the retina is upside down and backward. That image is passed through the optic nerve to the brain where the orientation of the image is then corrected and seen in the mind. Obviously, I’m leaving out most of the technical details, but that is the very basic idea. From the cornea to the brain, if any one part of the entire system didn’t work we wouldn’t be able to see. It’s complicated, and we don’t yet know how the mind displays what the eyes are seeing. What we do know is we can see and that is pretty fantastic! It is worth pointing out that not everyone can see well or even at all but that alone isn’t evidence of lack of designer because tissue degeneration and faulty development are a part of our fallen world. Requiring glasses isn’t poor design rather its poor development.
According to the theory of evolution, millions of years ago creatures had no eyes but very slowly with some luck and chance creatures began to develop a sensitivity to light, which given even more time and luck evolved into the variety of eyes we see today. Now on the surface that might not seem unreasonable, so let us take a closer look. Mathematically speaking if you have someone with 30% vision and someone else with 35% vision, in reality, does that make a difference in their survival? Indeed, one of them has 5% better eyesight, but would that slight difference urge natural selection to evolve better eyes? Consider this, if those two people were walking through a forest together and they stumbled upon an angry grizzly bear would a 5% difference in vision help or hinder their survival in any way? Most likely not. Therefore if having the slightly better vision is not really an advantage then natural selection doesn’t select it, which means over time it’s not going to evolve. Even if we can think of a theoretical series of steps to convert one structure into another over vast amounts of time, it doesn’t make it so and it doesn’t help us prove that vision came about from nothing to what we see across the world in nature today.
There are some other issues when it comes to the theory of evolution and its supposed development of the eye over millions of years. There are many different types of light sensitive organs found in nature, from the ability to only sense light and shadow to eyes that can see minute differences in light intensity, form, and colour. If we consider general eye shape, lenses, pupils or eyelids there is no pattern to suggest any evolutionary trend from simple to complex. Take the pupils of some creatures in the ocean for instance. Sharks are generally thought to be primitive compared to the bony fishes that purportedly came after them on the evolutionary time scale. Yet sharks have eyes with contracting pupils that can change size according to lighting conditions protecting them against bright light, whereas the supposedly more advanced and later evolved bony fishes have a pupil that is essentially fixed in size. Since sharks and bony fish live in the same environments it doesn’t make sense that bony fish didn’t inherit the shark’s adjustable pupils. For that matter, they should have passed on those adjustable pupils to their supposed descendants, the amphibians, and terrestrial vertebrates. Again, that’s not what we’ve discovered; the pupils of other vertebrates show no specific trend. Geckos, crocodiles, and chameleons all have different types of pupils that clearly satisfy their owner’s visual needs but don’t suggest any evidence of being essential for them to survive.
Take the nautilus and trilobites as a second example. The nautilus is a sea creature with a lens-less eye that is often described as being as simple as a pinhole camera. The circular opening allows in seawater and has a diameter of 0.4 to 3 millimeters. Due to the lack of a lens, the image is blurred, but the smaller the opening the less blurred it will be. However reducing the size of the opening, while improving image clarity, reduces the amount of light entering the eye, making the image darker. Simply put the eyes of the nautilus are “primitive”. Trilobites are a different story; the “earliest fossils” show evidence of complex eyes. Many had mosaic sensors that comprised of a cluster of perhaps 15,000 units and each unit had its own crystalline lens. One giant-eyed trilobite could see in almost all directions simultaneously. We might then assume that the trilobites with their complicated eyes evolved after the primitive looking nautilus. However according to evolution’s timeline that would be incorrect. Supposedly the trilobites evolved 570 million years ago, whereas the nautilus came along after between 400 to just after 500 million years ago. How is it that the allegedly less evolved eye came later?
There is a lot more information on this topic and I would encourage those interested to look further into it. From leeches to birds, there are so many examples of animals with eyes that don’t work with the evolutionary timeline. Also, the eye is just one of many examples of an organ with a low probability of evolving. So the next time you look up at the night sky or you’re swimming with sharks, Praise God for the wonderful gift of eyesight and his amazing designs. “Oh, taste and see that the LORD is good; Blessed is the man who trusts in Him!” Psalm 34:8
Rachel McDonald | February 16, 2017
Bergman, Jerry. “Did eyes Evolve by Darwinian mechanisms?” Journal of Creation. August 2008: Pages 67-74. Print.
Sodera, Vij. One Small Speck To Man: The Evolution Myth. Vija Sodera Productions, 2009. Print.