Can sense organs like the eye really evolve?

Like speech, I dont think the eye is evolutionary. One does not teach a child to speak - they just click and speech is ignited. Likewise, one does not teach someone to see. These are hard wired and come with the species, as with lungs, limbs and nostrils.

empirical evidence.Please call me when you have some. All you have to do is get some evidence of a human w/o speech.

See - emperical debate is chaotic, but always leaning away from Evolution for speech; the latter also based on conjurings not emperical evidences:

quote:

---

http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/lang/overview.php

​

Review Article
Introduction
Linguistics and evolutionary theory share an extremely tenuous historical relationship, as linguistics was more concerned with philology, rather than scientific observation, when Darwin first published the Origin of Species.1 The most important argument within contemporary linguistics and evolutionary theory was sparked by Pinker and Bloom's (1990) seminal analysis outlining comments made by Noam Chomsky and Stephen Jay Gould that contradicted the basis of modern evolutionary theory; this article led to an enduring debate that has persisted over the last decade.2 Since Chomsky and Gould have made a number of assertions that language (the communication system unique to human beings), could not have evolved through natural selection, and natural selection has long been the prevailing theory in evolutionary biology, the challenge presented by Pinker and Bloom was to develop a theory of language origin that was compatible with the mainstream theory of evolution, the theory of natural selection.3 Since then, however, research has provided evidence that some aspects of language may have been naturally selected for, in line with Pinker and Bloom's arguments, while other aspects of language did not result because of natural selection, thus also supporting Chomsky and Gould. The following explores and integrates the history, evidence, and theories surrounding both selectionist and nonselectionist explanations of the origin of language.

---

Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Your the one speaking nonsense, unlike an admin or considering posts with zero acumen.FYI< my position was this matter is highly "disputed" in the science world. I can post 50 more of the same evidential links from the most prominent evelutionists concerning particularly the eye organ, the biggest evolutionists there are.Please cease using silly, insultling posts when assuming a monitor's badge. Silly guy!