Defender's Guide to Science and Creationism
Assertion: The perfection of structures like the human eye is proof of creation.

Mark I. Vuletic

Last updated 08 April 2011


Although well-adapted to its purposes, the human eye is imperfect. I am no longer sure whether the inversion of the vertebrate retina to be as severe a defect as I had thought before, but the fact that it produces a blind spot in the visual field of each eye where the neurons exit must be counted as an imperfection: surely an all-powerful designer whose crowning creation was man could have done better than that, whatever we think of the general efficiency of the eye.

The blind spot is, of course, not the only imperfection in the eye: it suffers from all of the normal afflictions of the human body: vulnerability to trauma, disease, and wear and tear. Were the eye perfectly designed, we should expect it to be more resistant to malfunction than it is. Remember, when we talk about a god, we are talking about a being whose power is unlimited, not even being constrained by the laws of nature; had such a being wished to make our eyes out of glowing ethereal quintessence (with no blind spots), there would have been nothing to stop him. Perhaps one might argue that the deficiencies of the eye, like the pain of childbirth, were the results of the Fall of Man, coming into being because of God's response to the disobedience of Adam and Eve; however, this is to acknowledge that things as we see them today are in fact imperfect, and thus takes away the evidence the assertion appeals to at the start. [I discuss elsewhere other arguments against the evolution of the eye.]

Imperfect engineering is apparent in far more than the human eye, and extends beyond the vulnerabilities of flesh. Useless and inefficient structures that appear to be relics of distant ancestors abound in the natural world, such as the hollow bones of flightless birds, the clumsy "thumb" of the giant Panda, and the vestigial pelvis of pythons and whales (Futuyma 1983:198-200). If these things are the work of a creator, the creator apparently wants us to believe in evolution.

All Disqus comments will be moderated. Please use common sense.

Comments powered by Disqus