"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility."
Vagon (atheist) pointed out to me that this quote was originally not in its entirety. I don't see how that matters though... he still says that it seems absurd (with or without the context).
Here's what someone noted about the quote, "The above quote is Charles Darwin's quote in entirety. It seems evolutionists think that's a plausible explanation for the formation of the eye... imperfection to complexity.... hmmmm (... second law of thermodynamics, perhaps!)
Thing's go from complexity to imperfection not the other way around, the suggestion that the eye could be formed by that process is "absurd in the highest degree."
Famine in the Land. Stop wandering! :-)
3 hours ago
What a horrible quote mine. If you are so dishonest about a simple quote, why should anyone believe what you actually create?
ReplyDeleteFor those who want to know, here is the complete quote: ""Organs of extreme Perfection and Complication. To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms, in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility."
-Origin of Species, ChVI difficulties of the Theory
Im sorry that I did not put up the whole quote, but it dose not mater anyways. The point that I was trying to make is that Charles darwin disagrees with his own theory,and I think its proof anouf not to balive in this fairy tall for grown ups (Evolution)
ReplyDeleteJames try re-reading the quote, because you have demonstably not understood what was written. He doesn't disagree with his own theory.
ReplyDeleteInstead of copy and pasting creationist websites, think for yourself. Actually see what Darwin is positing, let me give you a quote-mined tid-bit: "the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory."
I suggest you familiarise yourself with the evolution of the eye, because what Darwin guesses actually is observable all throughout nature. Isn't the real world amazing?
Agin im sorry, I just put up the whole quote,
ReplyDeleteand I admite I did put it out of context, But still Evolution is just a fariy tall for grown ups. Plees vist needGod.com
Thanks James.
ReplyDeleteI've visited needgod.com I like the intentions behind it. Please enrole in science classes, or if you're homeschooled take the time to order an introduction to evolution.
You'll see it doesn't require any miracles to believe in evidence :)
your welcome.
ReplyDeleteIm glade that you visited needGod.com did you take the test? Because you relly do need Him. Just so you know evolution is not sience its a religeon you have to belive that it is true, And what evadince have evolutionests ever came up with?
Well done James, it was that and other quotes from Charles Darwin that lead me away from evolution.. it was the final evidence I needed that evolution is a faith based theory. Not long after I gave my life to Christ, and it's been the most amazing journey.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the great work!