Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Birds See [evolution of the eye]
Scientific American ^ | July 2006 | Timothy H. Goldsmith

Posted on 07/03/2006 10:05:56 AM PDT by doc30

We humans customarily assume that our visual system sits atop a pinnacle of evolutionary success. It enables us to appreciate space in three dimensions, to detect objects from a distance and to move about safely. We are exquisitely able to recognize other individuals and to read their emotions from mere glimpses of their faces. In fact, we are such visual animals that we have difficulty imagining the sensory worlds of creatures whose capacities extend to other realms--a night-hunting bat, for example, that finds small insects by listening to the echoes of its own high-pitched call. Our knowledge of color vision is, quite naturally, based primarily on what humans see: researchers can easily perform experiments on cooperative human subjects to discover, say, what mixtures of colors look the same or different. Although scientists have obtained supporting information from a variety of other species by recording the firing of neurons, we remained unaware until the early 1970s that many vertebrates, mostly animals other than mammals, see colors in a part of the spectrum that is invisible to humans: the near ultraviolet. ...

(Excerpt) Read more at sciam.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: bird; creationism; evolution; eye; ignoranttheocrats; kindastupid; ludditefundies; lyingforthelord; paganjunk; pavlovian; roadtohorseshitpaved; saganscience; youngearthcultists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-364 next last
To: Windsong

I don't care, it was a funny cartoon, and it had a good message.

Or is FR so monolithic now that you can't put up a comic like that anymore without being accused by someone of not toeing the official line?

Lighten up.


21 posted on 07/03/2006 10:28:09 AM PDT by Central Scrutiniser ("You can't really dust for vomit.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: doc30
What Birds See

A Bald Eagle regularly sits atop a pine tree in my backyard about 150 feet from the water's edge (on the Puget Sound). Just stares at the water. ....hunting. His prety moves under the water, sometimes hundreds of feet offshore. I'm sittin' there with high-power binoculars unable to see a thing out there, but that great bird spots his prey every time, and swoops down out of the sky for the kill, emerging with fresh fish. Unfathomable vision.

22 posted on 07/03/2006 10:29:47 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc30
So, for those that say the eye could not have evolved because it is too complicated, be aware that it has now been shown that our eyes have de-evolved from non-mammilian vertebrates.

From this statement I can gather that a methodical and repeatable experiment has been performed?

23 posted on 07/03/2006 10:29:52 AM PDT by fella (Respect does not equal fear unless your a tyrant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jagusafr
...if you believe in that sort of thing...

Why wouldn't you?

24 posted on 07/03/2006 10:29:56 AM PDT by Junior (Identical fecal matter, alternate diurnal period)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Windsong

Conservative != Christian.


25 posted on 07/03/2006 10:31:01 AM PDT by Junior (Identical fecal matter, alternate diurnal period)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fella

"From this statement I can gather that a methodical and repeatable experiment has been performed?"

Why would that be necessary in a historical science? Science doesn't require lab experiments.


26 posted on 07/03/2006 10:32:02 AM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman (Gas up your tanks!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke
Uh huh. There was a time when you could hold a substantive discussion of this sort of thing on FR. I used to enjoy those threads. Judging from your own join-up date you may never have seen them unless you lurked for quite awhile prior.

The topic of sensory apparatus in animals is quite interesting, actually - I'm sure you agree or you wouldn't have posted this one. Now take a look at how long it took to - shall I dare to use the word "evolve"? - let's say "veer" into the familiar swamp of creationism/evolution/intelligent design. Not the five posts I predicted - precisely one. One post. That's what I'm complaining about.

27 posted on 07/03/2006 10:32:27 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Windsong
You do know that this is a Conservative site, right?

Lighten up Francis. We should be able to laugh at ourselves and life sometimes. Humor is good for the soul.

28 posted on 07/03/2006 10:33:25 AM PDT by BipolarBob (Yes I backed over the vampire, but I swear I looked in my rearview mirror.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hometoroost

I don't buy the point the Trudeau comic was trying to make, but I did think it was really funny.

Heck, the word "evolved" could mean lots of things. The Corvette has evolved. I believe that kind of evolution exists.


29 posted on 07/03/2006 10:34:25 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: doc30

Fascinating reading and thank you for posting it. It explains much about successful predatory of birds for example. I plan to tell my children about this as we have many hawks and owls around our home. As I write this, I realize the hawks have taken over the territory - have not seen/seen an owl around this year. Hmmmm...was it the hawks or Hurricane Rita as we didn't see/hear birds for quite some time after Rita.


30 posted on 07/03/2006 10:34:27 AM PDT by daybreakcoming (If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BipolarBob

Your tagline cracks me up.


31 posted on 07/03/2006 10:35:23 AM PDT by CholeraJoe ("Jack Bauer" is Arabic for "I'm f*cked.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: conservativefreak

So what you're saying is that creationists believe in de-evolution. Something like the universe is went from order to chaos, right?


32 posted on 07/03/2006 10:35:34 AM PDT by BipolarBob (Yes I backed over the vampire, but I swear I looked in my rearview mirror.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fella

It's not just the eyes that have de-evolved. There's a reason you have to find an external source of vitamin C in your diet, while your dog manufactures his own. Either that, or the Creator made you inferior to your pet.


33 posted on 07/03/2006 10:36:15 AM PDT by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: doc30

What has been observed, according to the author: Different eyes, operating with different strengths.


What is pure conjecture in the article: that some sort of evolution is involved.

All the eyes could also have been designed that way.

There is proof for neither hypothesis, nor is either provable or disprovable. Dontcha just hate that?!


34 posted on 07/03/2006 10:37:07 AM PDT by RobRoy (The Internet is about to do to Evolution what it did to Dan Rather. Information is power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativefreak
what a creationists means when s/he says that they don't believe in evolution they mean that they don't believe that random mutations can add complexity to an organism that didn't already have it in it's genetic code

You mean like the different bacteria that have evolved to make themselves immune to anti-biotics? The immunity that wasn't in their genetic code before, but is now?

35 posted on 07/03/2006 10:37:11 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: doc30

The article assumes common descent and then explains differences in that context. In reality, eyes are merely different. The concept of descent w/ modification is imposed on the data, not an artifact of the data itself.

Statements like 'Mammals were once that way too', 'Mammals became nocturnal and lost two receptors' are unsupportable and are mere conjecture.

Makes a nice story and that's all that counts to evos.

How good is your imagination?


36 posted on 07/03/2006 10:38:00 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: villagerjoel
I don't think many of those who don't believe evolution to be fact are arguing that organisms don't adapt and change.

What do you think evolution is?? It is the process in which organisms adapt and change.

How can you not believe in a process that you just admitted to be true? The theory of evolution does not address how life formed. It addresses how life adapts and changes.

37 posted on 07/03/2006 10:40:29 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: doc30
A certain lineage of primates experienced a mutation that shifted slightly one of the color receptors and evolved a weak version of trichromatic vision. Humans are part of that lineage.

What was the mechanism for this miraculous mutation that effected all subsequent primates? What was the mutagenic agent that caused this specific mutation? Care to speculate?

38 posted on 07/03/2006 10:41:07 AM PDT by Mogollon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hometoroost

LOL. It's a good thing creationists don't ever oversimply and label things they disagree with because it's easier than thinking.

Well, except for the thread over the weekend in which a creationist stated that "that 'scientists'--i.e. hedonistic materialists amongst the larger set of all scientists--worked very hard because they wanted to copulate like bunnies without any thought about God observing their libidinal escapades."

There is plenty of questionable behavior and statements by both sides. Too bad you're only keeping score for one team.


39 posted on 07/03/2006 10:41:19 AM PDT by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

It seems there has been quite a degradation of quality lately. Brazen personal attacks, attempts to hijack threads, non sourced or flat out erroneous info...

And I have seen flat out cruelty. I mean, really mean spirited people who seem to want their name in lights while they skewer someone.

Many of the intellectuals and political theorists have left.

Not the FR I remember from the late 90's.


40 posted on 07/03/2006 10:42:33 AM PDT by djf (I'm not Islamophobic. But I am bombophobic. Same thing, I guess...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-364 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson