Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: the eye

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 16 Nov 12 10:22 PM | 44 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix 		Msg. 11792 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 11791 by DigSpace)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

hi dig,

absolutely.

the wing is for we amateurs. feathers are all about nice easy notions like heat regulation, mating, flight and water resistance.

i just don't have the ability to remember all that great stuff about eyes.

i try to get away with flight because stephen jay gould used it and i reckon if it's good enough for him, it'll do for me.

i know about darwin and the eye and its use by both sides of the design argument but i cannot remember the intermediate steps. hopeless of me!


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
the eye
By: DigSpace in ALEA
Fri, 16 Nov 12 10:14 PM 		Msg. 11791 of 54959

Start:
Light perception. We see this in plants, they have no eyes, yet they turn their leaves to follow the passing sun.
We see this in single cell thingy’s in water. They have a pigment spot (no lens, no cornea, no retina) just a pigment spot, and a nerve, and they can follow light.
We see that in some wormy like things that the pigmented cell lie in a bit of a dent on the surface. The dent protects the pigment cells. And light can fall into the dent and bounce around.
We see in some other wormy things slime over the dent. This covering allows more light capture. Aberrations in slime amount afford crude focusing in some instances. This amplifies the light signal, an advantage in low light. A droplet of water does the same thing. A slime blob is just a way to keep the water droplet in place.
We see space between the slime and the cells in the dent in others. Again a small advantage. The slime evolves towards lens, the pigment cells evolves towards retina. Give a few million years to get it done.We can easily imagine incremntal improvements on slime (lens) and pigment cells (retina) once the geography is in place. And we observe this geography in simply organisms. If the eye falls as the poster child of ID, everything falls, few machines are more complex.
And so on.
Each little bit providing a distinct advantage over the previous model.
The eye is the poster child of intelligent design, and yet we can incrementally recapitulate they eye with extant phylogeny and observe the intermediates in ontogeny. The poster child notion is well-debunked.
“Ontogeny recapitulates Phylogeny “ … a mantra of developmental and evolutionary biologists.
Similar treatises in complex machines like RNA or DNA polymerase and so on afford similar results. These are remarkably complex multi-subunit structures, and yet value for intermediates is routinely observed.
:End

« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next