[_ Old Earth _] Eye sockets

[John]

The Eyes Have It - Creation Is Reality Part 2
Author: John Muise

“The complexity of eyes still argue for the reality of instantaneous formation by an incredibly intelligent designer, There is neither a fossil record showing that the eye evolved nor any testable observations explain how it could possible happen.†This statement by Bruce Malone shows just one example of the weakness of Evolution theory. Generally passed off with the popular scapegoat "the evidence is there we just have yet to find it" by the evolution theorists because they can’t explain it and they are just plain ignorant, it’s obvious the eye was designed.

After reading this article by Mr. Malone, Another fact arose in my mind that needs to be questioned about the evolution theory. Eye sockets. It is a true wonder that throughout history not one skeleton has been found that has had no eye sockets; this seems to be a huge stumbling block once more for evolutionists. Nobody has an answer to this, should we not see smooth transitions of the eye socket evolving? Or any link between no eyes and eyes for that matter, it comes again as no surprise to me that no evidence has been found for any transition; the eye socket is no exception.
Some reasons for needing the eye socket:
1. Protection
2. Support
We can logical conclude from the lack of evidence of any kind supporting eye/eye socket evolution indicates that the eye and eye socket always were, God created us folks.

 

[jwu]

Before i get to the actual substance...have you actually looked for studies which explain the evolution of the eye? If yes, where did you search?

 

[John]

Before i get to the actual substance...have you actually looked for studies which explain the evolution of the eye? If yes, where did you search?

i am talking about eye sockets not eyes

 

[Patashu]

Um, they go hand in hand. You can't have an eye socket without an eye.

So, how long did you search for scientific information and papers concerning eye evolution before giving up and saying there must be none? Where did you search?

 

[John]

Um, they go hand in hand. You can't have an eye socket without an eye.

So, how long did you search for scientific information and papers concerning eye evolution before giving up and saying there must be none? Where did you search?

1. Google
2. The local high School
3. The local campus
4. Dalhousie University
5. Wait...theres no five yet...

Um, they go hand in hand. You can't have an eye socket without an eye.

So your saying they evolved at the same time ?

Hmmm, okay, still where is the evidance for your claim?

4 out of 5 sources agree we me. what should the #5 be a guy with a Ph.D in something ?

 

[Patashu]

An eye socket would have co-evolved with any eye that needed to be sharp and detailed.

Also, google isn't a source in itself, and I doubt you've checked EVERY page google has indexed. You need to be more specific then 'google' because you don't look on google itself but the pages it leads to.

 

[John]

Hmmm, okay, still where is the evidance for your claim?

 

[Patashu]

Evidence for my claim that 'you can't have an eyesocket without an eye'? OK.

The eye socket evolved to hold a cupped eye. The eye socket has no other use outside of holding this eye. Therefore if there is no eye to hold the eye socket will not evolve (as there is no selective pressure for having an eyeless eye socket, and in fact pressure against it since it is a worthless structure.

 

[John]

Evidence for my claim that 'you can't have an eyesocket without an eye'? OK.

The eye socket evolved to hold a cupped eye. The eye socket has no other use outside of holding this eye. Therefore if there is no eye to hold the eye socket will not evolve (as there is no selective pressure for having an eyeless eye socket, and in fact pressure against it since it is a worthless structure.

Hmmm, okay, still where is the evidance for your claim?

 

[Patashu]

Why don't you tell me WHY a creature would evolve an eye socket without an eye? Then maybe I'll take your question seriously, because from my point of view I have provided as much of a detailed answer as is necessary.

 

[John]

Why don't you tell me WHY a creature would evolve an eye socket without an eye? Then maybe I'll take your question seriously, because from my point of view I have provided as much of a detailed answer as is necessary.

No you gave me your opinion, the fact remains that there has not been one skeleton found without eye sockets, therefore due to the huge lack of evidance we must conclude that the eye/eye sockets have always existed...since creation.

 

[Patashu]

The main problem is that prior to the cambrian period basically no creatures have fossilized since you need a hard structure to make a fossil with.

But you really think that if I can't present a fossil to you that lacks eye sockets evolution is 100% false, creationism is 100% true and eyes have existed forever?

Do you want a worm or something? Those don't fossilize unfortunately. I found a news article about one found in amber but that was only from the jurassic.

 

[John]

The main problem is that prior to the cambrian period basically no creatures have fossilized since you need a hard structure to make a fossil with.

But you really think that if I can't present a fossil to you that lacks eye sockets evolution is 100% false, creationism is 100% true and eyes have existed forever?

Do you want a worm or something? Those don't fossilize unfortunately. I found a news article about one found in amber but that was only from the jurassic.

nope it would not prove anything, but it would install more doubt into the evolution theory if other "less desenceizised " people read it

 

[Patashu]

*heh*

Again, I don't believe I can provide you with fossils pre-eye, since that would also be before fossilization is possible (due to the lack of hard parts to fossilize). What I can do is show you a completely plausible pathway mutation and natural selection could take to produce a fully functioning eye in an environment where one would be useful, and also show you that all of these intermediate stages exist in creatures we can observe today.

 

[John]

*heh*

Again, I don't believe I can provide you with fossils pre-eye, since that would also be before fossilization is possible (due to the lack of hard parts to fossilize). What I can do is show you a completely plausible pathway mutation and natural selection could take to produce a fully functioning eye in an environment where one would be useful, and also show you that all of these intermediate stages exist in creatures we can observe today.

thats news to me.

be if i saw a transition of a skull showing the evolution process of eye sockets i might just turn evolutionist myself, lol

 

[Patashu]

Why eye sockets specifically? Why not all the work done in primate evolution or equine evolution? Why not the predictive power of evolution in all other facets? We don't have all the information and evidence, but we definitely have enough to conclude that the theory of evolution is the best known. framework for these observations. We haven't gone to pluto or alpha centauri and measured the gravity there either.

 

[John]

Why eye sockets specifically? Why not all the work done in primate evolution or equine evolution? Why not the predictive power of evolution in all other facets? We don't have all the information and evidence, but we definitely have enough to conclude that the theory of evolution is the best known. framework for these observations. We haven't gone to pluto or alpha centauri and measured the gravity there either.

becuase the evidance is sketchy at most.

look at hte "missing" link threads i made, also the horse evolution chart was disproved over 50 years ago

 

[Patashu]

By who and using what evidence? Show me.

 

[John]

By who and using what evidence? Show me.

i prefer evidance like bones and fossils over bio viruses and such show me some of that.

 

[Patashu]

You've already been shown it and you've denied it outright. What, do you want to see it again?