Eye Evolution Not: Dawkins' Reductionism

Hello YouTubers, how are you today? I hope you're doing good. Today's commentary is in response to the video called Dawkins Makes an Eye. The Dawkins video is a prime example of the kind of reductionism that evolutionists like Dawkins have to engage in so that they can try to convince you to believe how easy it could have been for eye to form. First I would like you to go and watch the Dawkins video. And then go watch this video at this link and pay close attention to detail. And then come back here and listen to this commentary. Okay, if you paid close attention to detail, you should have noticed at least a dozen things that Dawkins never even touched upon or even mentioned that they were part of the eyes overall system. Let's dissect Dawkins video. I want to see if I can design an eye using those principles from scratch, a bear patch of skin. From scratch, to claim you were starting from scratch using a light sensitive patch of skin is like saying I'm going to build this computer from scratch. But the motherboard, the processor chip, the memory chips, the hard drive and the power supply are already in place. And I'll show you how I'm going to build the outer case which is merely a shell. Because that light sensitive patch of skin is thousands of times more complex than all of those computer parts combined. Dawkins himself once pointed out the following in I quote, there is enough information capacity in a single human cell to store the encyclopedia of Britannica all 30 volumes of it three or four times over, unquote. Let's continue. Okay, you'll notice he has light hitting this patch of skin and somehow wants you to believe that that alone can cause a reaction by the brain. Well, the fact that matter is the brain can do nothing until the light waves are converted into nerve impulses by a complex series of rods and cones in the retina. Which is a part of the optic nerve. No where does Dawkins show you an optic nerve developing and never mind the fact that he doesn't even suggest how the first brain that did this even knew what to do with this information the first time it got it. Since it had never seen anything before. Dawkins would have you believe the brain just accidentally sent instructions to not only the crystalline like lens to expand or contract in order to focus. But also to the eyes muscles which Dawkins also never mentions or shows developing which make the eyeball move. Let's go through some of the other parts that Dawkins never mentions or shows developing which are crucial for the eye to work. Dear glands, they excrete a form of germicide that flushes and cleanses the entire eye and then flushes it into the tear ducts. The soft layer of tissue that surrounds the eye and protects it from jolts and shocks. The muscles on top and bottom that let the eye move around it in an up and down side to side and even in a circular motion. The optic nerve itself that transfers light rays into nerve impulses. There are three layers to the eyeball, the sclera, the coroi, the retina, and each serves a different function. Light entering the eye must pass through first the cornea which acts as the eyes out of motion lens. It functions like a window that controls and focuses the entry of light into the eye. The cornea contributes between 65 and 75% of the eyes total focusing power. The X-WES humor provides nutrition for the Avascular Accular tissues, the posterior cornea, the tubercular mesh work, the lens, and the anterior vitrious. Then the light must pass through the pupil which regulates the amount of light that enters the eye with the help of the eye risk which is embedded with tiny muscles that dilate and constrict the pupil's eyes. Then as the past through the crystalline lens which can expand or contract to help focus on objects that are at different distances and in conjunction with the brain, you can do this all in nanoseconds. Finally the vitrious humor which is a transparent jelly-like mass located behind the lens, it acts as a suspension for the lens so that the delicate lens is not damaged. It helps to maintain the shape of the posterior chamber of the eyeball. After that the light reaches the retina which then senses the light and converts it to nerve impulses which it sends to the brain. The darkens shows you none of these parts developing or even bothers to mention that such functions are being controlled by these various parts. The darkens also has this patch of skin receding. It doesn't tell you why it even starts to recede or how this patch of skin just happens to be in the right spot on the skull. Where it just so happens there is an eye socket there for it to recede into. Even a second eye socket for another eye to amazingly go through this whole process again and luckily that patch of skin too just somehow amazingly starts to recede in that location. And funny that this receding tissue never happens anywhere else on the body. I think it would have been advantageous to have an eye on the back of the skull. But the wonderful mechanism of mutation and natural selection never got around to that. And so while a darkens has an eye that looks nothing like the one you find in your head. Reductionism is a marvelous indoctrination tool used by people like Dawkins and most evolutionists with that matter. Their whole stick is don't worry about the small details. Just accept our summary explanations. We don't need to have the full details after all that devil is in the details. Thanks for watching and until the next time Lord willing there is an next time may God bless you, Richmond.