Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
1 byte removed ,  16:03, June 29, 2016
→‎top: Spelling/Grammar Check & Cleanup
Line 3: Line 3:  
D. E. Nilsson and S. Pelger <ref>D. E. Nilsson and S. Pelger, "A pessimistic estimate of the time required for an eye to evolve" (Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 1994, v.. 256, pp. 53-58)</ref> used computer modeling of the evolution of eyes to find out if it was possible for there to be a smooth gradient of change from a pigmented eye spot to an [[eye]] with a lens and cornea, and how long such a transformation would take. They used highly conservative figures for the possible change in each generation. Many human traits are over 50% heritable, and they gave their model a lower figure. They also chose very conservative values for the amount of possible variation in a population. Using these figures, they calculated that through the mechanism of evolution an eyespot could evolve into an eye with a lens and a cornea in less than a half a million years.
 
D. E. Nilsson and S. Pelger <ref>D. E. Nilsson and S. Pelger, "A pessimistic estimate of the time required for an eye to evolve" (Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 1994, v.. 256, pp. 53-58)</ref> used computer modeling of the evolution of eyes to find out if it was possible for there to be a smooth gradient of change from a pigmented eye spot to an [[eye]] with a lens and cornea, and how long such a transformation would take. They used highly conservative figures for the possible change in each generation. Many human traits are over 50% heritable, and they gave their model a lower figure. They also chose very conservative values for the amount of possible variation in a population. Using these figures, they calculated that through the mechanism of evolution an eyespot could evolve into an eye with a lens and a cornea in less than a half a million years.
   −
This scenario is contested by [[Young Earth Creationists]], who point out that the scenario begins with a highly-complex structure, and doesn't include the supporting neural structures, without which the eye would be useless.<ref> Sarfati, Jonathan , with Matthews, Michael, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3287 Refuting Evolution 2], chapter 10.</ref>
+
This scenario is contested by [[Young Earth Creationists]], who point out that the scenario begins with a highly-complex structure, and doesn't include the supporting neural structures, without which the eye would be useless.<ref>Sarfati, Jonathan , with Matthews, Michael, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3287 Refuting Evolution 2], chapter 10.</ref>
    
==References==
 
==References==
Block, SkipCaptcha, apieditor, Automoderated users, Bots, edit, ratelimit-exempt
58,183

edits

Navigation menu