Seversky
Posts: 442
Joined: June 2010
|
I cannot believe Dembski is still using the example of the human eye in his presentation.
| Quote | (3) “The inverted retina.” Vertebrate eyes have nerve cells in front of the light-sensitive retinal cells. This means that light first has to pass through a barrier before being detected. This seems counterintuitive, but there are good functional reasons for it. A visual system needs three things: speed, resolution, and above all sensitivity – if the eye isn’t sensing light, it’s useless. Now, it turns out that light-sensitive cells are the most oxygen-greedy cells, and they get their oxygen from blood. The sensitivity here is truly astounding – some frog eyes can sense the smallest unit of light (the photon). Positioning the nerves in front of the light-sensitive retinal cells ensures maximal blood supply to the retina and thus maximal sensitivity.
|
He must be aware that, in the fovea, which provides the sharpest vision, the photoreceptors are not obscured by all that 'wiring' and 'plumbing', which suggests that having all that stuff in the path of incoming light does degrade the image.
Yes, the penalty is that those cells use oxygen faster than it can be supplied and become 'fatigued'. But is he really saying that it is beyond the wit of an omniscient God to design an oxygen supply system that can meet the demands of those cells without getting in the way of the incoming light?
We can understand evolution not coming up with a perfect solution but a tri-omni God?
|
