False again. You wouldn't see as well without rods, but you wouldn't be blind either (ever hear of night-vision loss from vitamin-A deficiency)
First off, you're wrong. You can see quite well without rods; you'd just be night-blind.
Eyes undoubtedly evolved from a photosensitive patch of tissue which could sense light and darkness. By constricting the aperture in front of the patch of tissue, the organism acquired some directionality in photosensing.Mutations affecting the shape and transparency of the protective layer in front of the tissue eventually led to primitive imaging capabilities, which as they became more acute gave a selective advantage.
The eye is a particularly bad example of IC; clearly just being able to tell light from darkness is an advantage, and all you need for that is a primitive retina, some epidermal tissue to protect it, and a couple of nerves to transmit the information. Actually, as long as you can use a hormone like melatonin, you don't even need the nerve. And we know organisms with capabilities over the whole range from photosensing to directional photosensing to poor imaging to good imaging.
Here's a link with references
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html
It seems as if you are fighting an uphill battle, Qwinn. I'd just like to say that the question you've posed is one that I've always wanted to have answered also. Fred Reed dedicated his latest column to this exact subject. You can find it here:
http://www.fredoneverything.net/EvolutionAgain.shtml
Have a great day!