Originally posted by sonhouse
Frigging brilliant! Intelligent design. What a laugh.
For instance, why did humans get retinal blood vessels in FRONT of the rods and cones that gives us vision? Other animals don't have that. So your god designed us in such a way as to insure vision less than optimal? It must have been the wish of your god that we have such poor vision compared with some other animals.
As far back as 2007, evidence emerged that showed there was something wrong with the evolutionists’ argument. Franze and his colleagues discovered that certain cells in the retina (Muller cells) act as optical fibers, funneling light right to the rods and cones. Now Labin and Ribak have modeled the dynamics of this system, and they conclude:
The retina is revealed as an optimal structure designed for improving the sharpness of images.
Why is this an “optimal” design for the eye? It’s actually quite amazing. There are two kinds of light that the rods and cones detect: light coming into the eye from the scene of interest, and light that has been scattered within the eye itself. Obviously, the sharpest image will be formed if the light from the scene is the only light allowed to reach the rods and cones. In other words, to form the best image possible, the scattered light (think of it as “noise” ) must be filtered out. Well, that’s exactly what the Muller cells do, according to Labin and Ribak!
So despite what evolutionists have claimed, the vertebrate eye is, in fact, designed incredibly well. It is designed to provide the sharpest images possible. As an article in New Scientist says:
IT LOOKS wrong, but the strange, “backwards” structure of the vertebrate retina actually improves vision.
If the eye were designed according to what many evolutionists have said is the obviously superior design (with light hitting the rods and cones first), we would not see things as sharply as we do now.