View Single Post
Old 08-26-2019, 12:29 AM   #1536
GtrsRGr8
Grand Sorcerer
GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GtrsRGr8 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,334
Karma: 27815322
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Southeastern U.S., ya'll
Device: Kindle; Kindle (10.1.1) for PC; Kindle Cloud Reader
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbovenka View Post
Read 'Climbing Mount Improbable' by Richard Dawkins. It goes into this 'problem' in detail. There is no issue with eyes and evolution.
Some biologist or other scientist proposed, about 14 or so years ago, that the eye could be created with something like 27 or 28 separate steps, starting with a light-sensitive spot on an organism. Although he is an expert in many fields, I don't think that it was Dawkins who made (at least, first) the proposal. I think that it was an evolutionary biologist who specialized in ophthalmology.

Yeah, I'd like to read or listen to, if possible, the book that you mentioned--I'll put it on my "want list." But since I am not a scientist, and furthermore Dawkins is brilliant, I couldn't dispute what he said if he was wrong. I might not even understand what he was saying, unless he really brought it "down to my level." If I am to be a believer, I have to look at apologetics from (a) completely different perspectives(s).
GtrsRGr8 is offline   Reply With Quote