Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Fred Williams

I'm In The Mood To Watch Evolutionists Squirm...

Recommended Posts

On 11/7/2009 at 7:16 AM, Fred Williams said:

Please explain the following:


Posted Image

Fred, this is a fantastic example. 

From wiki;


In order to understand the actions of the superior oblique muscle, it is useful to imagine the eyeball as a sphere that is constrained – like the trackball of a computer mouse – in such a way that only certain rotational movements are possible. Allowable movements for the superior oblique are (1) rotation in a vertical plane – looking down and up (depression and elevation of the eyeball) and (2) rotation in the plane of the face (intorsion and extorsion of the eyeball).

The body of the superior oblique muscle is located behind the eyeball, but the tendon (which is redirected by the trochlea) approaches the eyeball from the front. The tendon attaches to the top (superior aspect) of the eyeball at an angle of 51 degrees with respect to the primary position of the eye (looking straight forward). The force of the tendon’s pull, therefore, has two components: a forward component that tends to pull the eyeball downward (depression), and a medial component that tends to rotate the top of the eyeball toward the nose (intorsion).

The relative strength of these two forces depends on which way the eye is looking. When the eye is adducted (looking toward the nose), the force of depression increases. When the eye is abducted (looking away from the nose), the force of intorsion increases, while the force of depression decreases. When the eye is in the primary position (looking straight ahead), contraction of the superior oblique produces depression and intorsion in roughly equal amounts.

To summarize, the actions of the superior oblique muscle are (1) depression of the eyeball, especially when the eye is adducted; and (2) intorsion of the eyeball, especially when the eye is abducted. The clinical consequences of weakness in the superior oblique (caused, for example, by fourth nerve palsies) are discussed below.

This summary of the superior oblique muscle describes its most important functions. However, it is an oversimplification of the actual situation. For example, the tendon of the superior oblique inserts behind the equator of the eyeball in the frontal plane, so contraction of the muscle also tends to abduct the eyeball (turn it outward). In fact, each of the six extraocular muscles exerts rotational forces in all three planes (elevation-depression, adduction-abduction, intorsion-extorsion) to varying degrees, depending on which way the eye is looking. The relative forces change every time the eyeball moves – every time the direction of gaze changes. The central control of this process, which involves the continuous, precise adjustment of forces on twelve different tendons in order to point both eyes in exactly the same direction, is truly remarkable.

In terms of, "bad design", let's compare the claims of evolutionists and their list of bad design to the things the eye does well;

- Successful balance of rotational forces finely figured out to function "correctly". (we don't struggle to keep our eyes in position do we, like you may expect with a make-do design from a non-intelligent evolution process.

- Successful trochlea design enabling eye to be pulled in different directions mechanically and within a confined space.

- Correct ocular torsion. 

- No staggered movement like with technology. Notice you can move your eyes so smoothly, they don't creak or squeak nor is there any waiting.

- successful light-penetration of nerve net through clever Muller cells that collect light from largest possible surface area of the retina.

- Successful refreshment of the photo receptors through the choroid.

- we can see in colour 

- we have the software to take the elemental colours and interpret all of the subtleties thereof when merged.

- The lens and eyeball is self-washing, unlike when you have spectacles.

- We can change the focus of our eye, and see in immense detail and clarity.

- We can adjust to the dark by the pupil opening. (humans are diurnal not nocturnal so this would be more advantageous for nocturnal animals so the design seems to be limited but a cat's pupil opens fully which is why you see their eyes glowing, which is the layer behind the retina.)

- The eye lid can stop dust from entering our eye and it doesn't get heavy because it is the correct weight for the muscles.

- We have the exactly correct types of fluid in the eye such as the rhodopsin. It is very sensitive to light and perfect for low light conditions. (correct materials)

- correction of aberration.

- Neat, and beautiful structure.

- Array of glial cells successfull preserves acuity of images in human retina.

- Muller cells successfully remove the problem of, "noise" by directly transmitting light to the rods and cones.

- Muller cells tuned to visible region of spectrum to successfully minimize radiation and heat damage.

- The software in the brain to create vision,

These are some things a layman has gathered. (me)

Now let's look at the huge extensive list of things the eye is badly designed to do according to evolutionists. (pardon the grammatical tautology)

- Blind spot. (Get ready to laugh, it represents 0.2% of the visual field.) (and the dunce award goes to...........Dawkins!)

- Wrongly wired retina (which anatomists have corrected people like Dawkins on, it actually isn't "wrong" nor does it cause any problems)


Dr Sarfati: Ophthalmologist Peter Gurney, in his detailed response to the question, “Is the inverted retina really ‘bad design’?”6, also addresses the blind spot. He points out that the blind spot occupies only 0.25% of the visual field, so Dawkins is exaggerating to try to call it a patch rather than a spot. Furthermore, it is far (15°) from the visual axis, so that the normal visual acuity of the region is only about 15% of the foveola, the most sensitive area of the retina right on the visual axis. And having two eyes effectively means there is no blind spot. So the alleged defect is only theoretical, not practical. The blind spot is not considered handicap enough to stop a one-eyed person from driving a private motor vehicle. 

CONCLUSION: What would our conclusion be here? Perhaps an analogy is required. The technical name for the error evolutionists make in ignoring the list of correct, staggeringly brilliant design in the eye is called slothful induction fallacy. It sounds technical but isn't, all it really means by analogy is that if the most beautiful woman on earth were to walk in the room and someone said, "she has one freckle on her arm, therefore is ugly", they would have just committed that fallacy. The error is obvious, the person that would argue she is ugly is ignoring all of the majority of the evidence in order to INFLATE some small, negligible evidence that represents a tiny fraction of the overall evidence. The overall evidence is basically IGNORED. 

It's mendax flagrante. They know they are lying and basically just cheat with propaganda by saying, "evolution has won, there's no debate in science".

Conclusion; well there is no debate here, ID wins and there is not even a proper contest in terms of direct argumentation. That's why evolutionists DEPEND on indirect arguments not about EvC but instead about PEOPLE of EvC. Attacking the people of EvC and making it about people seems to be all they can do. (propaganda such as; "there's no argument in science", or, "most scientists agree it's E", or, "people that don't accept evolution are ignorant science deniers".)

But in terms of the toe-to-toe debates, evolution does not win and as you can see, takes a pasting in fact. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  


Important Information

Our Terms