How Can Dawkins Explain The Perfect Eye In Our Brains?

Thats a nice copy and paste... instead why don't you try reading more scientific work instead of ID dribble.

[SIZE="3"]The main reason why Darwin said, ?the thought of the eye made me cold all over? is the fact he had no explanation to offer in the face of the eye?s extraordinary complexity. But the fact is that Darwin knew very little about the eye. Genetics had not been discovered in his day, there were no electron microscopes and nobody even dreamed what microbiology was to reveal. Subsequent scientific advances revealed the extraordinary structure of the eye in all its glory. Since even the level of knowledge of the 19th century was sufficient to alarm Darwin, who knows what he would have done had he known what we know today.

Modern-day Darwinists are silent in the face of this extraordinarily complex structure. Under the burden of this defeat, the atheist Richard Dawkins is trying to supposedly offer an explanation for the complexity of the eye. He maintains that an organ such as the eye, which possesses irreducible complexity and can only function when 40 components are all present and fully formed, can actually function if not fully formed, despite this being scientifically impossible.

The fact is that the eye ceases to function entirely even in the absence of ocular fluid alone. It is deprived of all function if there are no eyelashes, no oil producing glands inside the eye or if the optical focusing function ceases. If the eye is to function as an eye it is essential that it have its perfect structure together with all its component parts.

However, the really essential matter, and that which inflicts the greatest defeat on Darwinists when it comes to the eye, is that IT IS NOT IN FACT THE EYE THAT SEES AT ALL. Dawkins and other Darwinists appear quite certain that it is the eye that sees and seek to bring a materialist explanation to bear. But they are mistaken.

It is the photon that strikes the eye, and an electric signal that travels from the eye to the brain. Departing from the eye, the electric signal reaches an area the size of a lentil known as the visual cortex. And an image forms in this lentil-sized area. THERE IS AN EYE that sees the image that forms here. AND THAT ?EYE? IS THE ACTUAL PERFECT EYE. That eye sees the electricity reaching it. And it perceives it with a perfect sense of depth, vividly, in motion and in three dimensions, in bright colors and flawlessly. Yet that area is totally dark. The place the signal is transmitted to, the visual cortex and the interior of the brain are all in pitch darkness. But the eye there sees a vivid image, clearer and more perfect than any produced by even the most advanced technology. And it interprets these images, feels sadness, joy, love and liking, performs analyses, remembers things and draws conclusions. How is Dawkins supposed to account for this eye?

It is impossible for Dawkins to account for it at all.

That is because the eye that perceives this moving, colored and three-dimensional world in our brains is OUR SOUL. The soul is completely metaphysical and cannot be explained in terms of any material concept. That is why materialists, atheists and Darwinists, who seek to account for the existence of the soul and everything in material terms are in a state of panic. The soul bestowed on human beings by Allah (God) totally demolishes Darwinism and all intellectual systems espoused by Darwinists. That is why all atheists, such as Dawkins, avoid all face-to-face discussion of the subject. It is understandable for them to seek a solution by avoiding the issue because they will always be defeated in the face of the perfection of the seeing eye in our brains and the soul created by Allah.[/SIZE]

You really are quite cluless. Would you like our scinetific experts to explain to you?