This is actually more of a "fright" for creationists who now have some "intelligence" creating forty different eyes for no particular reason. That different eyes would evolve along different paths strengthens evolution's case rather than the reverse. Bizarre logic from the author again.
Gore3000 is right and you're wrong. A designer or diffferent designers seeing a new function in one creature and wanting to provide it to another could easily take different paths to the same function, working with what was available in each separate creature. Likewise, humnan designers generally seek to provide a function and not some particular implementation to their users. Were that not the case, the worlds armies would have entered WW-II all using the same rifle calibre.
In contrast, for the eye to have evolved forty different times involves so great a violation of probabilistic laws as to be laughable.
In contrast, for the eye to have evolved forty different times involves so great a violation of probabilistic laws as to be laughable.
No, what's laughable is the ludicrous "logic" of Creationists. For instance, if the same protein shows up in different animals, it must be evidence of an "intelligent design". But if different mechanisms of eyes show up in different animals, then its evidence of "intelligent design". Quite amusing.