http://www.answersingenesis.org/pbs_nova/0924ep1.asp
You'll have to scroll down to the section that starts "Is there bad design?" Here are excerpts:
The retina can detect a single photon of light, and it's impossible to improve on this sensitivity! More than that, it has a dynamic range of 10 billion (1010) to one; that is, it will still work well in an intensity of 10 billion photons.
Another amazing design feature of the retina is the signal processing that occurs even before the information is transmitted to the brain, in the retinal layers between the ganglion cells and the photoreceptors.
The idea that the eye is wired backward comes from a lack of knowledge of eye function and anatomy.
He explained that the nerves could not go behind the eye, because that space is reserved for the choroid, which provides the rich blood supply needed for the very metabolically active retinal pigment epithelium (RPE). This is necessary to regenerate the photoreceptors, and to absorb excess heat. So it is necessary for the nerves to go in front instead. The claim on the program that they interfere with the image is blatantly false, because the nerves are virtually transparent because of their small size and also having about the same refractive index as the surrounding vitreous humour. In fact, what limits the eye's resolution is the diffraction of light waves at the pupil (proportional to the wavelength and inversely proportional to the pupil's size); so alleged improvements of the retina would make no difference.
It's important to note that the 'superior' design of Miller with the (virtually transparent) nerves behind the photoreceptors would require either:
See also the detailed response by the ophthalmologist Peter Gurney to the question Is the inverted retina really 'bad design'? This article addresses the claim that the blind spot is bad design, by pointing out that the blind spot occupies only 0.25% of the visual field, and is far (15 degrees) from the visual axis so the visual acuity of the region is only about 15% of the foveola, the most sensitive area of the retina right on the visual axis. So the alleged defect is only theoretical, not practical. The blind spot is not considered handicap enough to stop a one-eyed person from driving a private motor vehicle. The main problem with only one eye is the lack of stereoscopic vision.
Aig is a creationist con game. There is no science there.
They lie to you.
Hmmm. Are you saying that the Creator was restricted in his design of the eye and that is why we have so many limitations?
I've been cheated. My cat can see better in darkness than I have.
I can't make any claims about the human eye, but I can say that a smart four year old can design a better hinge joint than the human knee.
The human eye has TWO dead spots in low light conditions.
"The retina can detect a single photon of light, and it's impossible to improve on this sensitivity! More than that, it has a dynamic range of 10 billion (1010) to one; that is, it will still work well in an intensity of 10 billion photons."
An example of how scientific facts are distorted on creationists websites. A single photon may be "detected" but we will never see it. Also "intensity" units are wrong but most non-scientists would never notice that. Did you?
AIG says that the eyes are wired backwards to protect the rods and cones from UV. Why didn't God just make the rods and cones more resistant to UV instead of wiring the eye backards ...
Why would God design an imperfect "reproductive system" for humans in which there is a high probability of an aborted fertilized egg each time unprotected sex occurs?