by DavidMcC wrote:Back to the (surface-)vertebrate eye: it recently occurred to me that the "inverted" retina has an additional advantage for a fish that was forced up from the deep, dark ocean by shallowing seas (in turn caused by severe ice ages). Such a fish would have to cope with increasingly bright light falling on its retinae, so the inversion-induced covering of the photoreceptors by the nerve fibre layer would be just the ticket to avoid the problem. Until now, I had assumed that the nerve fibre covering was the price we paid for self-maintaining eyes, but it turns out that this is not the case after all. This is additional evidence that the vertebrates did, indeed evolve from a deep-water fish with non-imaging eyes, that was forced towards the surface as a result of geological/climatic changes.
That you expect anyone that was participating in this thread before your suspension to respond to new unfounded assertions is baffling. Do you really think that time has erased your shameful and deceitful accusations and avoidance of addressing refutations of your nonsense arguments from memories?
I for one have no use for and no interest in anything you have to say, and can only hope that you and your inane posts will be ignored by the general population from here forward.
