HOW CAN DAWKINS EXPLAIN THE PERFECT EYE IN OUR BRAINS?

Spread the love

The main reason why Darwin said, “the thought of the eye made me cold all over” is the fact he had no explanation to offer in the face of the eye’s extraordinary complexity. But the fact is that Darwin knew very little about the eye. Genetics had not been discovered in his day, there were no electron microscopes and nobody even dreamed what microbiology was to reveal. Subsequent scientific advances revealed the extraordinary structure of the eye in all its glory. Since even the level of knowledge of the 19th century was sufficient to alarm Darwin, who knows what he would have done had he known what we know today.

Modern-day Darwinists are silent in the face of this extraordinarily complex structure. Under the burden of this defeat, the atheist Richard Dawkins is trying to supposedly offer an explanation for the complexity of the eye. He maintains that an organ such as the eye, which possesses irreducible complexity and can only function when 40 components are all present and fully formed, can actually function if not fully formed, despite this being scientifically impossible.

The fact is that the eye ceases to function entirely even in the absence of ocular fluid alone. It is deprived of all function if there are no eyelashes, no oil producing glands inside the eye or if the optical focusing function ceases. If the eye is to function as an eye it is essential that it have its perfect structure together with all its component parts.

However, the really essential matter, and that which inflicts the greatest defeat on Darwinists when it comes to the eye, is that IT IS NOT IN FACT THE EYE THAT SEES AT ALL. Dawkins and other Darwinists appear quite certain that it is the eye that sees and seek to bring a materialist explanation to bear. But they are mistaken.

It is the photon that strikes the eye, and an electric signal that travels from the eye to the brain. Departing from the eye, the electric signal reaches an area the size of a lentil known as the visual cortex. And an image forms in this lentil-sized area. THERE IS AN EYE that sees the image that forms here. AND THAT “EYE” IS THE ACTUAL PERFECT EYE. That eye sees the electricity reaching it. And it perceives it with a perfect sense of depth, vividly, in motion and in three dimensions, in bright colors and flawlessly. Yet that area is totally dark. The place the signal is transmitted to, the visual cortex and the interior of the brain are all in pitch darkness. But the eye there sees a vivid image, clearer and more perfect than any produced by even the most advanced technology. And it interprets these images, feels sadness, joy, love and liking, performs analyses, remembers things and draws conclusions. How is Dawkins supposed to account for this eye?

It is impossible for Dawkins to account for it at all.

That is because the eye that perceives this moving, colored and three-dimensional world in our brains is OUR SOUL.
The soul is completely metaphysical and cannot be explained in terms of any material concept. That is why materialists, atheists and Darwinists, who seek to account for the existence of the soul and everything in material terms are in a state of panic. The soul bestowed on human beings by Allah (God) totally demolishes Darwinism and all intellectual systems espoused by Darwinists. That is why all atheists, such as Dawkins, avoid all face-to-face discussion of the subject. It is understandable for them to seek a solution by avoiding the issue because they will always be defeated in the face of the perfection of the seeing eye in our brains and the soul created by Allah.

Mar 18, 2009

Source:  www.harunyahya.com


Spread the love

Comments

7 responses to “HOW CAN DAWKINS EXPLAIN THE PERFECT EYE IN OUR BRAINS?”

  1. ZAFER HAKTAN Avatar
    ZAFER HAKTAN

    I hope you will not make it a habit of publishing such unscientific crap.

    Is Turkish forum a support base for creationist BS?

  2. This is one of the most pathetic and moronic refutation of Evolution without the slightest understanding of modern Biology.

    There are countless examples of working eye prototypes in the nature that do not possess all the functionalities of the eyes of a higher animal. There are bacteria sensitive to light, there are multi-lens (compound) eyes such as in insects, there are eyes that only pick up direction, etc… Moreover, our eyes are far from being perfect, there is a huge blind spot right in the middle of it where the retina connects to the optic nerve. If our eyes where designed, why weren’t they designed properly without a blind spot? On the other hand, a better version of the single lens eye is present in cephalopods (squids, octopus,…) where there is no blind spot and some other improvements.

    The argument that there are no intermediate “lesser eyes” is a complete fallacy as examples of transitional forms abound in nature. Creationists just seem to have a much larger blind spot that ignores evidence!

  3. Mehmet Balkaci Avatar
    Mehmet Balkaci

    I find it hard to understand why Turkish forum keeps posting these nonsense material from a notorious pseudo religious figure whose name was involved in illegal activities and sex scandals. As a biologist I can safely say that the evolution of the eye is not a puzzling mystery to the science community at all.

    Some people learned socialism from Stalin others learned democracy from W. Bush and some learn Islam form Harun yahya (Adnan oktar) is there no limit to how deep we can sink? read below…

    In September 1999 Adnan Oktar was arrested following multiple scandals and further allegations that were fully covered by the Turkish media. in that court case, Oktar was charged with using threats for personal benefit and creating an organization with the intent to commit a crime. One complainant, a fashion model named Ebru Simsek claimed she was blackmailed, and then slandered as a “prostitute” in fax messages sent to hundreds of different newspapers, TV channels, major business companies, foreign consulates and government offices for refusing to have sex with Adnan Oktar. The judicial process lasted over two years, during which most of the complainants’ retracted their claims, reportedly because of threats or bribes from SRF members. As a result most of the cases against Oktar and SRF members were dismissed, with only two members receiving jail sentences for 1 year each.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Oktar

  4. Omi Doubletide Avatar
    Omi Doubletide

    Unfortunately, I haven’t seen anything that could be considered scientific in this article. The charlatan called Harun Yahya is “illiterate” as far as science is concerned. In some of his writings in early 2000s, you could see that he did not know the difference between heat (isi) and temperature (sicaklik), although he was trying to show that something was related to thermodynamics. It is a shame that the Turkish Forum is providing a platform for dubious characters like H. Yahya. He is a cult leader at best and should be treated accordingly.

  5. Oh yes “Wikipedia”, Mr Balkaci…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Oktar

    Reference no: 63: “Police cracks down on obscure sect” by Amberin Zaman, 8 December 1999

    This link does not work from where I am. 🙂 It is supposed to be hyperlinked to
    “http://web.archive.org/web/20010217142739/www.turkeyupdate.com/adnan.htm”

    The source is Amberin Zaman… This is what Ilhan Selcuk has to say about Amberin Zaman:

    “[Taraf gazetesinin] Önemli yazarlarından Amberin Zaman’ın kocası CIA’nın ajanı…”

    Kaynak: Cumhuriyet, 23 Aralık 2008

    By the way, he starts his article with these words:

    “Son dönemde basın yaşamına katılan Taraf gazetesinin ağır basan özelliği askere bindirmek…”

    Coming soon: Turkipedia… (*

  6. ERMENİ YENİ TEZGAHLAR PEŞİNDE.

    * Dünyayı sözde soykırım yalanına inandırmak için elinden geleni ardına koymayan Ermeniler, yeni bir oyun sahneye koyuyor! İçeride Taraf yazarı Amberin Zaman, dışarıda ise The Economist’in rol aldığı yeni oyunun ana teması, Atatürk’ün yüzlerce Ermeni kadın ve çocuğu kurtarması…

    * Oyunun hedefi ise “Atatürk karşı çıktı” makyajıyla, seyircilerin bilinçaltlarına sözde soykırım iftirasını yerleştirebilmek… Tarihçi ve yazarlar, “Bu iddialar gerçekle bağdaşmıyor. Atatürk’ün adı kullanılarak sözde soykırım iddialarını makul hale getirmeye çalışıyorlar” diye konuşuyor.

    Taraf Gazetesi yazarı Amberin Zaman’ın imzasıyla anonsu yapılan yeni tezgahın dış ayağını da The Economist üstlendi ve “Bu hikaye, bugünkü Türklerin çoğu için sürpriz olacak” diye yazdı.

    Atatürk üzerinden sinsi Ermeni tezgahı

    Ermeniler sözde soykırımı iftirasını kabul ettirebilmek için yeni stratejilere başvuruyor

    Taraf gazetesinden Amberin Zaman da Economist dergisi gibi “Ermenileri Atatürk kurtardı” tezini işleyen bir röportaja imza attı.

    Yıllarca “Türkler bize soykırım uyguladı” iftirasını kullanan Ermeniler, iddialarına meşrulaştırmak için taktik değiştirdi. Türk tarihini ikiye bölen Ermeniler, iftirayı genç Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’ne kabul ettirebilmek için “Osmanlı’nın elinden bizi Atatürk kurtardı” yalanına sarılmaya başladı. Taraf gazetesi yazarı Amberin Zaman “Atatürk yüzlerce Ermeni kadın ve çocuğu nasıl kurtardı” başlıklı bir röportaj yaparken The Economist dergisi de son sayısında benzer iddialarda bulundu. Dergi, Türkiye ile Ermenistan’ın yakınlaşma çabalarını değerlendirdiği analizinde “İki tarihi düşman” arasındaki ilişkilerde iyileşme umudunun doğduğunu vurguladı. Analizin başında Atatürk’ün Ermenilere yönelik tutumuna dikkat çekerek şunları yazdı: “Modern Türkiye’nin babası Kemal Atatürk, birinci dünya savaşı sırasında ve sonrasında yüzlerce Ermeni kadın ve çocuğu, Osmanlı kuvvetleri tarafından toplu olarak katledilmekten kurtardı. Şimdiye kadar anlatılmayan ve herhalde bugünkü Türklerin birçoğu için bir sürpriz olacak bu hikaye, Erivan’daki Ermeni soykırımı müzesince toplanan ve müdürü Hayk Demoyan’ın ’yakında sitemizde açıklanacak’ diye söz verdiği birçok belgeden biridir.”

    Makul gösterme çabası

    Tarihçi ve Araştırmacı yazar Cezmi Yurtsever ise iddiaların gerçeklerle bağdaşmadığını söyledi. Dergide yapılan yorumların Mustafa Kemal ismini kullanmaya yönelik olduğunu kaydeden Yurtsever, Ermenilerin son dönemde Diasporayla birlikte Türkiye üzerindeki etkilerini arttırmak istediğine dikkat çekti. Yurtsever, “Türkiye-Ermenistan ilişkilerinde son dönemde geline noktada Türkiye’ye bir takım mesajlar veriyor. Burada da Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’ün ismi kullanılarak bir mesaj veriliyor. Soykırımı iddialarını makul hale getirmeye çalışıyorlar” şeklinde konuştu.

  7. haluk Avatar

    “Londoners are more likely to believe in creationism than elsewhere in the UK, a survey found.”
    –Birmingham Post, 01 July 2009, “Creationism Belief Strong in London”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *