Re: Fish eyes...

Randy Landrum (randyl@efn.org)
Mon, 11 Nov 1996 20:35:22 -0800 (PST)

>> I guess my biggest response to this was "Huh?"
>>...I don't see what fish getting their faces bit off has to do with
>>anything, or what having a PhD or not has to do with anything (I;m still
>>working on the B.S.).

I was told some time ago that unless I had a Ph.D. My views were not
relevant. I simply dissagree with that opinion. Don't get me
wrong I truly respect anyone who would spend that much time and
effort, but depending on the mentor, education may just as well be
indoctrination, evidence of OBE abounds.

About the Fish, It's a symbol of christianity and more receintly
a counter symbol of Darwin. Evolution I assume being the
sprouting of legs.

When those who profess to be Christians ignore huge sections of
scripture to fit the evolution of religion for science, they are
nothing but a rotting mouth symbol of christianity. They are the
predator that bites off the face of all those who have died and
used the symbol of the Fish as their faith in Jesus Christ.

Psalm 94:9 He that planted the ear, shall he not hear?
He that formed the eye, shall he not see?

God can create an eye but it is our choice to see. My point is
clear unless you refuse to see it. There is more evidence to
evolution how ever destructive in a fish surviving one step in the
food chain than attempting to down play the evidence of intelligent
design of the amazing ability and complexity of the eye.

"It is not just the complexity of living systems which is so
profoundly challenging, there is also the incredible ingenuity
that is so often manifest in their design. Ingenuity in biological
design is particularly striking when it is manifest in solutions
to problems analogous to those met in our own technology. Without
the existence of the camera and the telescope, much of the
ingenuity in the design of the eye would not have been perceived.
Although the anatomical components of the eye were well known by
scientists in the fifteenth century, the ingenuity of its design
was not appreciated until the seventeenth century when the basic
optics of image formation were first clearly expressed by Kepler
and later by Descartes. However, it was only in the eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries, as the construction of optical
instruments became more complicated, utilizing a movable iris,
a focusing device, and corrections for spherical and chromatic
aberration, all features which have their analogue in the eye,
that the ingenuity of the optical system could at last be
appreciated fully by Darwin and his contemporaries"

-Denton

>> Two more examples just hit me: university administrations
>>and the U.S. government bureaucracy. Lots of complexity, little
>>to no intelligent design.

Unlike the government that is not created with Godly wisdom
eyeballs don't just pop into or out of existence as a result of
random events. Let's not confuse clutter with complexity, however
both can be evidence of a creator. There of course a difference
between Divine or Human creation.

>> So, is the eye more like a nice simple camera with no extra
>>parts, or more like the U.S. government, basically functioning but
>>having lots of paperwork, silly rules, inefficiancy, relic
>>agencies, systematic errors and vestigial traits and no reason
>>for the way it is except the contingencies of history? Lemme
>>know what you think.

I enjoyed reading your post Nick. It made me think... That was
my purpose of the seemingly unrelated fish story. Evolution really
is just that a fish story. The effects of Mutation as in the example
of an injured fish is not evidence of intelligent design. Evolution
if it is true would be hideous, painful and unmerciful. Accidents,
Mutations, & random selections are not the creative processes that
engineered the the eye.

Camera's may seem simple to you but even the first camera a large
box with a hole in it was a result of intelligent design. The
first camera was used by artists to aid in their work. They walked
into the camera attached a piece of artist paper on the back
wall and traced the image that the hole in the box created. The
distance or focal length must be exact. Something many evolutionist
may not understand is that even though the eye is a marvelous
example of intelligent design (I have a wonderful article about
the eye if you are interested) it takes an optic nerve and a brain
to see. The camera cannot record an image without a complex process
of film, chemical, light exposure in exact intensity and duration,
enlarger, light sensitive paper filters aperture more chemicals all
under the control of intelligent individual possessing art and
scientific skills.

The evolutionist Dr. Ernst Mayer once said:

--it is a considerable strain on one's credulity to assume that finely
balanced systems such as certain sense organs (the eye of vertebrates,
or the birds feather) could be improved by random mutations" (E.
Mayer, 'Systematics and the Origin of Species' (N.Y. Columbia
University Press, 1942, p. 296).

=====m-_
`,_` ./.~`-,. "Throughout the hundreds of millions
=,` / 'i '~+=,_ of years the coelacanths have kept
v. . !-. = __. ~\=. the same form and structure. Here is
` ,_. , i`,_'\.- ~e_ one of the great mysteries of evolution"
' -.-,s @@Wi[ ,z,c \\.
.Y/ ,_-8!s/*fi! '',_\,!@m[ Jacques Millot, "The Coelacanth"
_si /i@Wzzz`--,dPV\gW@f
YP -i 'i -. gAY,g@@P ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
,!/!5 . iK| !d@/` ~
-=`-(- ',,`! Wf+i dMTf~~Y**f[ ~ Randy Landrum
!-! ! ,./,@b- -WW/b@mW~msm! ~ B.A. Brooks Institute
P-' , ' ~_dA~~M@WD*fV\]bA@@f ~ US Coordinator FaithNet 700:1000/0.0
e..! ,,!A`im/ - .*NW@@@Wf ~ randyl@efn.org
*\ 5-~~,@. = sNWW@@@@Af ~
@XW`. A~ 2+e2@@@@@A~ ~