Yeah and it’s not like there’s any literature on that question. It’s been completely ignored by evolutionists ever since Darwin. Right?
Nilsson D., Pelger S. A pessimistic estimate of the time required for an eye to evolve. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 1994; 256:53-58.
1 Like
Tagging on: “Eyes” have independently evolved 40 times at least (maybe 70?). This is one of those very strange cases where some people seem to think the MORE it happens, the LESS likely it is to occur.
3 Likes
That’s good! I can start with you. Show me where a system has been clearly defined in the literature which involves no information exchange. And then clearly explain step one of evolving this system to one that will create our visual system. Or any other subjective experience. Or any organism which would dare to smirk at the grave of a godly man.
I think that ID has made it apparent to laymen that you won’t be able to do this. I will wait for your answer.
Perhaps you are unaware of the history of this forum. 
There has been quite a bit of discussion on this topic, just not much recently. I think this is the oldest one:
with addition side discussion:
https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/side-comments-on-evolution-of-the-eye/2455
And a bit here:
https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/scd-asks-questions-on-design-and-evolution/12352/34
BUT maybe I misunderstand what you are asking?
If one step is all you need, I do not understand why you think all the steps must be difficult.
1 Like
I have no idea what you mean by a system that involves no information exchange, much less why that seems to be your starting point for arguing about the evolution of eyes.
But I can tell you step one in the evolution of eyes. Change a g-protein coupled receptor so it becomes sensitive to the presence or absence of light. That means the g-protein binds a chromophore (such as retinal), and a mutation to lysine at position 296 (in the typical opsin) in the g-protein makes it able to affect the conformational change in the g-protein that ultimately results in changed genetic expression (and thus cellular behavior).
A membrane bound chemical receptor of a certain class (GPCRs), already tied to regulated cellular behavior, becomes an opsin. The cell now reacts to the presence of light. You now have your first eye.
Done.
1 Like
I’ll stop you right there. You are a Molecular Biology Technician. Are you able to determine a system that involves information processing from one that does not?
Since I don’t know what you mean by that or how you think it relates to eyes, no.
Again. You are a Molecular Biology Technician. How do you determine a system that involves information processing from one that does not?
My toilet has a lid on it that opens a closes. Like my laptop. Can a Molecular Biology Technician determine the difference between a toilet and a laptop?
I think so, yes. How does that relate to the evolution of eyes?
So you understand the point better when I say information processing instead of information exchange.
Show me where a system has been clearly defined in the literature which involves no information processing. And then clearly explain step one of evolving this system to one that will create our visual system. Or any other subjective experience. Or any organism which would dare to smirk at the grave of a godly man.
I think that ID has made it apparent to laymen that you won’t be able to do this. I will wait for your answer.
No, not at all. You have simply given me examples of things you consider to have information processing (a laptop), and things which do not (a toilet).
I genuinely do not understand why you try to relate this to the evolution of eyes. I think to explain the first step in the evolutionary origin of eyes I need to explain how an organism gained the ability to react to light.
I think talk about information processing (or exchange) is a needless complication that offers zero clarity to the question of how eyes first evolved.
So I will just dispense with your call for taking these ill-defined terms into consideration and direct your back to my previous explanation. I have explained the first step in how an organism could gain the ability to react to light, which I would consider the first step in the evolution of eyes. I have met your challenge.
Ok. You win. What I was saying really isn’t that important anyway.