Eye Don’t Believe in Evolution

From Issue: Discovery 12/1/2006

Imagine waking up one day and seeing a shiny new digital camera on the floor in the middle of your room. You quickly notice that it has a relatively small enclosed chamber, along with a tiny opening, called an aperture, that lets in light. The aperture is covered by a shutter, which regulates the length of time light is allowed though the aperture. The camera also has a lens to help focus the image being photographed, and a computer memory card to store the image.

What would you think if your science teacher said that your camera just evolved by time and chance? Even though it looks like it has been designed and it works perfectly, you are asked to believe that the camera had no designer or creator, but is the product of evolution. Such a thought is absurd. No sane person would argue that your new camera evolved naturally over millions of years.

But what about your eyes, and their ability to “take pictures”? Evolutionists teach that your eyes are the result of time and chance. Yet, similar to the camera, each of your eyes has an aperture, called a pupil, and an iris that adjusts to make sure the right amount of light passes through the eye. On top of the iris and pupil is a clear protective plate called a cornea.

Once light passes through the cornea and pupil it moves through a lens, which can adjust its shape to help clarify the image. The picture is then focused on the retina. Your retina contains two kinds of light-sensitive cells (called rods and cones) that convert different types of light (red, blue, and green) into chemical signals. Those signals pass from the retina to the optic nerve, and then on to the brain where the picture is stored.

Does this complicated process sound like the result of an accident? The truth is your sense of sight is a blessing from God, not an effect of evolution. Doctors have studied it for centuries, and are awestruck by its complex design. It is far better than any camera. So much so that even Charles Darwin, the noted father of evolutionary theory, had to admit: “To suppose that the eye…could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest sense.”


A copied sheet of paper

REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.

Reproduction Stipulations→