Hi havoc, still struggling with denial I see.
First let me ask you to admit that you are making a theological statement here. That you know how a designer would design.
Not at all.
What I am arguing is that these are the kinds of things we would likely see from design that would
differentiate it from evolution -- it is no good to say that you have a theory that explains exactly the same thing as existing theory and nothing new: all we need is the original theory then to explain the evidence. Once again this is how science works, by differentiating between explanations through tests and experiments, and then picking the best explanation for all the facts as tentative truth until the next theory does a better job of explaining
ALL the evidence.
And
THAT is why you need evidence that evolution cannot explain.
Second there are numerous reasons for the eye to orientated the way it is including prevention of blindness at bright lights.
Not really a problem, sorry. Again, this is solved in human design by the use of filters over binoculars, telescopes and cameras that enable them to, among other things, look directly at the sun without harm.
Many animals have nictitating membranes ...
Nictitating membrane - Wikipedia
quote:
The nictitating membrane (from Latin nictare, to blink) is a transparent or translucent third eyelid present in some animals that can be drawn across the eye for protection and to moisten the eye while also maintaining visibility. Various reptiles, birds, and sharks have a full nictitating membrane, ...
Nictitating membranes are found in birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish, but are less common in mammals, mainly being present in monotremes and marsupials.[1] ...
So now we can copy and paste the fully functional nictitating membrane from reptile\birds to the composite mammal\cephalopod eye. This is an even better design as it also provides some additional protection for the eye, and results in an eye fully functional over a larger range of light environments, with improved vision in all situations, from dim light to looking directly at the sun.
So instead of calling someone an eagle eye we should be calling them an octopus eye?
No, eagles have the same sort of eye that mammals have, with a backwards retina. They do have nictitating membranes though, which helps them stare at prey longer without blinking. They have trouble seeing in dusk and dark, which is why they hunt in daylight.
Is the Octopus eye not a violation of your Nested Hierarchy?
No, because the eye evolved in divergent lineages after the last common ancestor between cephalopods and tetrapods. Just as the eye evolve independently in insects.
Instead it is just more additional evidence for nested hierarchy due to common descent.
You call it convergent evolution which is a catch all for everything that doesn’t fit you neat little line charts.
Not really -- it is convergent evolution of the eye to take advantage of the opportunities provided by being able to see, which is why you see eyes evolving again and again: they have a definite survival benefit. It is called convergent because it starts with different parent organisms and evolves to similar traits to take advantage of similar ecological opportunities.
So again my point from earlier there is no way to disprove your theory because it is dogma.
And still you miss the point of how falsification works: evolution has not been falsified because it can't be, it has not been falsified because there is no existing evidence that shows it is falsified.
I've listed several ways that it could be falsified by a design process that voids the evolutionary path, but there is no evidence of such combinations or changes to improve traits inherited by common ancestry -- from traits that are readily available in other organisms to copy and paste, but which cannot be transmitted horizontally by any known evolutionary processes.
In addition, when a theory is falsified in science that does not mean that all the evidence explained by that theory disappears in smoke, as it needs to be included in the new theory that explains all the current evidence PLUS the evidence that the old theory cannot explain.
Einstein's theory of gravity works by explaining anomalies that Newton's theory did not AND by explaining all the evidence that Newton's theory explains: in fact it reduces to Newton's theory in local situations. This is why Newton can still be used in rocket science.
I’m still looking for the mermaid but something tells me this would not shake your unequivocal FAITH.
You are mistaken in two different ways. First, it would not shake my
faith (see signature), and second it would only alter what we know about existing organisms: if there were objective empirical evidence that mermaids exist or had existed then they become part of the known diversity of life that would need to be explained. If that explanation needs to include horizontal composites of fish and mammal, then that would falsify common descent in the same way that horizontal composites of different eye designs would, and evolutionary science would adjust to that reality.
It would not falsify all the known existing objective empirical evidence for evolution, it would be included as an alternate path for new features to arise, and as such may cause some rethinking of the nested hierarchies of descent.
Unfortunately, for you anyway, it cannot change the factual objective empirical evidence of evolution that has occurred and that has been observed and that has been documented.
You can't falsify evidence, you can't falsify history and you can't falsify science. All you can falsify are theories that explain the evidence and the history and that are used in the various sciences and that are modified as needed to keep up to date with the evidence, history and all the other sciences that are known.
You can't go backwards.
That evolution happens is a fact, not a theory. Any new theory would need to explain something that evolution does not AND explain all the known evidence that evolution does explain.
And
THAT is why you need evidence that evolution cannot explain.
But it won't make evolution go away, rather it will incorporate it into a new theory that explains
ALL the evidence. That is the way science works.
Enjoy.
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
™ Version 4.2
(1)