Eye Evolution: Comments about the Great Debate

No offense to Zhimbo, whose first post was superb, but this is not a fair fight. Joralex is just a hopeless bastard. I love this line:

quote:

---

Note also that "seeing" isn't merely receiving an electromagnetic signal since, if this were so, then rocks also "see".

---

Anybody still puzzling over this rhetorical question?

quote:

---

For instance, I hand a blue crab a fully-formed human eyeball - is it of any use to the blue crab?

---

If the subject of the debate weren't in the thread title, I'd wonder:

quote:

---

Haeckel used the words, "simple little lump of albuminous combination of carbon" to describe "simple" life. Of course, this was before we had learned of the immense complexity that is in a cell - any cell.

---

quote:

---

The fact remains that without ALL of the 40 proteins present and in their precise structure, their is no flagellum - period!

---

quote:

---

Tell me : is it possible that life was planted here on Earth by aliens from another galaxy roughly 600 million years ago?

---

And then, after Percy had made it clear Joralex has another whole week to come up with a decent reply, the J-man apologizes for being pressed for time during the formulation of the response. Good strategy.------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall

Ned,I think you answered your own questions about the J-man's argument. They're not talking about the evolution of the nervous system or brain. Zhimbo doesn't have to propose a developmental pathway for anything except an organ of sight, and Joralex seems to find it unfair that the evolution of the entire neural network doesn't have to be explained in detail.I admit Joralex could get some mileage out of his assertion that a series of eyes in increasing order of complexity don't necessarily constitute a developmental pathway. At least that's relevant to the topic.------------------
The dark nursery of evolution is very dark indeed.
Brad McFall