Posted: Apr 12, 2020 3:44 am
by The_Metatron
Wortfish wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
Read that part in bold red font. Read it again. Read it until you understand it, and forever forget about that quote mine of yours as any sort of support for whatever you believe.


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 [b][color=#FF0000]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.


A lot of "IFs"....just speculation rather than substance. But, as Mivart pointed out, the slight gradations required may not confer sufficient utility to the organism to be conserved and so would be liable to be lost.

Do you use a hammer or simply put your head in a vise to come up with shit like this?

Every one if those conditional statements are true. "...as is certainly the case." It doesn't matter a toss what you believe to be true, cannot, or will not understand. Reality shows us otherwise.

Come back when your arguments are worthy. Or when you actually have one.