The miracle of our eyes alone made even Darwin stumble. He wrote: “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 sense” (The Origin of Species, 1859)
The human eye possesses 130 million light-sensitive rods and cones which convert light into chemical impulses. These signals travel at a rate of a billion per second to the brain. On top of that, the processing power of the brain is represented by not one, but thousands of processors networking into one major super “computer” to process all this information. And talking about multitasking, take for example the retina of the eye, which is like your computer’s webcam, in that it converts received light (images) into electrical code for transmission to the brain for processing. Except, unlike a webcam, the retina has its own processing power, sort of like a sub processor – 100 million neurons packed into a one centimeter by one millimeter space.
This stunning little processor is capable of processing ten images, each of about a million light points, every single second. Not only that, the data isn’t transmitted over a single fiber of nerve cells, but over a cable to the brain made up of a million of these fibers, all transmitting bits of data at the same time in an innumerable complex condition.
Also, unlike a webcam, the eyes not only receive information, they project it. Our eyes can communicate emotions and are said to be the window of the soul. Scientists estimate that the muscles in our eyes make more than 100,000 movements a day.
After reviewing the improbability of such organs, such as the eyes, arising in nature from an evolutionary process, Professor H.S. Lipson, a member of the British Institute of Physics, wrote:
“We must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a conclusion that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.”
Alan Gillen explained it best when he wrote: “No human camera, artificial device, nor computer-enhanced light-sensitive device can match the contrivance of the human eye. Only a master engineer with superior intelligence could manufacture a series of interdependent light sensitive parts and reactions.”