Evolutionists are hard-pressed to explain the step-by-step chance evolution of the eye which is characterized by a staggering complexity (Figure 16). Furnished with automatic aiming, automatic focusing, and automatic aperature adjustment, the human eye can function from almost complete darkness to bright sunlight, see an object the diameter of a fine hair, and make about 100,000 separate motions in an average day, faithfully affording us a continuous series of color stereoscopic pictures. All of this is performed usually without complaint, and then while we sleep, it carries on its own maintenance work. 77
The human eye is so complex and sophisticated that scientists still do not fully understand how it functions. Considering the absolutely amazing, highly sophisticated synchronization of complex structures and mechanisms which work together to produce human vision, it is difficult to understand how evolutionists can honestly believe that the eye came about through the step-by-step, trial and error evolutionary process. This is especially true when we realize that the eye would be useless unless fully developed. It either functions as an integrated whole or not at all. Thus, the piecemeal evolution of the eye is completely outlandish and unreasonable.
Charles Darwin acknowledged the utter inadequacy of the evolutionary theory when attempting to account for a structure such as the eye:
"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 possible degree ... The belief that an organ as perfect as the eye could have formed by natural selection is more than enough to stagger any one."
An incomprehensible constellation of favorable, integrated, and synchronized mutations would have to occur to produce an organ such as the eye. Granting evolutionists' generous concessions, Wysong nevertheless computes the probability for the chance formation of an eye at 1 in 10 266 ! In light of these scientific facts, today's evolutionist would do well to abandon his dogmatic attitude and follow the honest example of Charles Darwin who conceded this serious flaw in the evolutionary theory.
The evolutionist's problems are further complicated by the fact that the evolutionary theory calls for the chance development of the eye several times, not just once. Frank Salisbury comments on this dubious prospect:
"My last doubt concerns so-called parallel evolution ... Even something as complex as the eye has appeared several times; for example, in the squid, the vertebrates, and the arthropods. It's bad enough accounting for the origin of such things once, but the thought of producing them several times makes my head swim."
The inescapable conclusion is now quite evident. The eye did not just happen to develop at all but rather was created in the beginning by God in its complete and magnificent form. In the wise words of Sturmius, "examination of the eye is a cure for atheism."