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?!
Nonsense. Genetic studies back up this assesment. It's in the full article, but you either have to pay for on-line access or have a paper subscription. It traces the genetic lineage regarding the color recepotrs of the different groups of animals involved. But then again, creationists apparently don't believe that genetic information indicates ranking of relationships between living things.
There is evidence for ToE.
There is no "proof" in science.
You don't think ToE is disprovable? So you disagree with the findings of ID researchers? They claim to disprove evolution.