Eyes and Intelligent Design

with input from Dr. Curt Deckert

According to an article written by AITSE Consortium member Dr Curt Deckert, our eyes out-perform even the “Hasselblad H4D-200MS, a 200 megapixel camera designed for use in high-end commercial photography studios,” and they do it in 3-D! Moreover, our retinas each contain about 100 megapixels in multiple layers of sensor cells that have “millions of pathways that allow information to be partially processed on the way to the brain.”

Therefore, up until now, treatment of those rendered blind by retinitis pigmentosa, a disease that kills the retinal cells that convert light into electrical signals, has been more than we are capable of. Retina Implant AG took on the challenge. And, they are making headway, having invented a retinal implant consisting of a “three-by-three-millimeter microelectronic chip containing about 1,500 light-sensitive photodiodes, amplifiers and electrodes…” This has given nine of ten patients “a narrow field of vision” in black and white–basically they can distinguish light sources and and “lighted objects against dark backgrounds.” According to the company’s director, they are now working on expanding the field of black and white vision. However, giving patients the ability to see in color is a long way off and there was no mention of the ability to see 3-D.

Note that there were obvious and massive amounts of intelligent design that have had to go into making the Retina Implant, which gives patients rudimentary vision. But, Richard Dawkins and other evolutionists often point to the suboptimal design of the eye as evidence against intelligent design. They choose rather to believe that the amazing functional complexity of the eye arose not once, but many separate times, as a result of random mutations followed by natural selection.

Makes a person think that what was reported by a group at Ohio State University is true: “Belief in evolution boils down to a gut feeling.”  But, good science is based on impartial evaluation of evidence, not mere consensus.