[HankReardon]

I'm not "pretending" anything. And I would never tell you what to say or what not say. It would be unreasonable for me to imagine something as intricate and complicated as the human eye could just happenstancely come into being through mutations. I'd have to see the evolutionary drawing on that one. Like the cartoon that shows the monkey to the becoming a man.

I try keep an open mind about things that are yet to be proven.

The question that comes to my mind is how would the light taken in by the "light sensitive patches of skin" penetrate through a skull with no openings, eye sockets.

A thought! possibly non-vertbrae animals, such as earthworms would be sensive to light, my flashlight when I'm looking for bait! But an earthworm and I most definately do not share any ancestors, cousins nor in-laws.

you know, it's all just such a far stretch of little reason and a whole lot of faith to believe in evolution.

[Alter Kaker]

If you need cartoons to understand, here's a cartoon.

The question that comes to my mind is how would the light taken in by the "light sensitive patches of skin" penetrate through a skull with no openings, eye sockets.

Because it evolved long before skulls. There are primitive light sensing mechanisms in single celled protozoa. Vertebrate evolution is comparatively recent.

A thought! possibly non-vertbrae animals, such as earthworms would be sensive to light, my flashlight when I'm looking for bait!

I don't know what that sentence means. But yes, invertebrates do have a variety of different eye types. For a chart of invertebrate eye evolution, see below.

But an earthworm and I most definately do not share any ancestors, cousins nor in-laws.

Most definitely? If you say so, but science indicates otherwise.

you know, it's all just such a far stretch of little reason and a whole lot of faith to believe in evolution.

So if I get this right, your entire argument is "I can't wrap my mind around evolution -- it's just too complicated for me to understand -- therefore it is implausible." An argument from incredulity is not an argument.