Evolution OF Creation

I'm splitting this between two posts. The first is a conclusion I came up with quite a while ago. The second is a recent thought/question I had while looking in a mirror and suddenly thinking of the first. Same train of thought, continued over several years, but with a new twist... so two posts.

To begin. A while back (years) I was doing some self-philosophy, playing both sides of the Evolution versus Creation argument in my head (rather interesting if you're not a "Christian"). At some point, for reasons I can't remember, I started using bats and mice as possible evidence of evolution that isn't documented like dinosaurs to birds, apes to man, fish to crocs... My argument there was that if you really looked closely at bats, you could easily see mice with wings, or vice versa. Since evolution is a change brought about by environment, and the need to survive changing environments, I could easily see a mammal growing wings, or losing wings, depending on temperature or food sources. Maybe airborne foodstuffs became scarce, and bats began to forage on the ground, and lost their wings. Maybe mice took to the air to get away from certain predators. I of course started wondering which would have come first, bat or mouse, but that's not the point here... the point is there are a lot of examples of evolution all around us.

BUT, as I played the argument out, and I really started to question physical change to increase survival rates, I made a realization: sight. Instead of going through all of my detailed examples, I will skip right to our species. The human "sight network" (eyeball, optic nerve, vision parts of the brain, depth perception) is one of the most complex biological devices on the planet. Did it evolve that way? If so, why? It has been proven, under the right circumstances, humans can survive without sight. In fact, most creatures on the planet can survive the right circumstances without sight. Some species are naturally almost totally blind, and they get by. The other senses do a great job of putting information into the brain, and it is said that without sight, the other senses are enhanced. IF sight was an evolutionary requirement for survival, why so much detail? Why color?

My conclusion became that sight as we know it in most organisms is NOT an evolutionary requirement for survival. For something so complex to form from a beginning of one-celled organisms, I theorize that some form of higher power was behind the design, and perhaps the construction, of the biology behind sight. I'm not saying a God, or aliens, or anything in particular, just a higher power. Hell, if you think about it in planetary terms, it's almost like sight has helped betray the balance. If no creatures could see, would there be a population problem? Would mankind have made it to the top of the food chain? I hypothesize that we would not. So, were we evolving just fine, and suddenly someone said "Let them see light?" Hmmmm...

And, that was the short short version.

Part 2. So the other day I was in the shower and thinking about the higher power thing (I will admit, the plot behind Assassin's Creed and the concept of the planet 'Nibiru' started me on that road again). Out of the shower, and in front of the mirror, and we all look different. Wait. Where did that come from?!

No matter what direction is taken, be it science or theology, what is the explanation for differences in appearance? I understand the DNA and genes part of it, but why did those things start to play a role? Evolution is about survival, and procreating the species. Two things which do not require any members of any species to appear different. Yes, if we all looked alike, things would be boring, but we could still survive and procreate. DNA and genes are pretty damn complex. Between that complexity, and there being no need to look different to fulfill the purpose of a species, why would evolution make so many variable changes? I just don't see the requirement that would need to be filled.

On the flip side of the argument, we have creation. If you were some higher power, and you planned to make a new life form (or alter one that already exists), what would be the purpose in making variables to change appearances with each new version? If the goal is to create a race of beings to accomplish a task, why do they have to look different? If it's just a "mad scientist's" experiment to see if life can be achieved, wouldn't it be a waste of "laboratory" resources to add unnecessary extras like DNA and genes?

And it's not just humans, because they say there's no two things alike on the planet (except for the theory of the doppelganger, which my verdict is still out on because I've never seen evidence). I personally can't tell the difference between two ants, but I don't make a habit out of studying ant anatomy. Anyway, that's a LOT of extra work for evolution, work that isn't a requirement to promote survival. It also seems like a lot of extra work under the concept of creation, and again, it doesn't make sense for all species unless the goal of each species is appearance, which seems like a really dumb purpose for creation. Sidenote: from a Christian view, God made us in his/her own image... then why don't we ALL look like him/her?!

You see how the two posts fit together. We (man and beast) have sight, but do we NEED it? We all look different, but how does that help us accomplish the goals of our species? If we didn't have sight, it wouldn't matter what we looked like!

The whole thing doesn't make sense. Since the dawn of rational thought, great thinkers have asked "why are we here." Maybe if we can figure out why we can see, and why we appear different, we will understand why we are here. Otherwise, this is a damn conundrum...

Hey look, finally a reply to this!

1.  From going off of your title, and in part some of your opening post, I've always liked both ideas of creationism and evolution.  The thing that I don't like about both is that with evolution, it states that everything evolved from nothing, from animals and plants to stars and planets, everything came from nothing... and than WHAM, that nothing was under so much energetic pressure from nothing that it somehow exploded because nothing influenced it, and when the nothing collided with the nothing in an ever expanding explosive cloud of nothing, something was generated, which began to reproduce more something out of nothing.  With creationism, same thing...  where did this creator come from?  Did this entity just "wake up" one day (or night) and all of the sudden knew everything, create everything, or did it have to learn about itself, can sentience and self-awareness... did the Creator, in fact, have to mentally grow up (or *gasp* evolve) into omnipotence?  

If you believe in the Bubble Theory, where the universe expands, then shrinks back upon itself, collapses, and then explodes again because of the mass of everything being compressed into a single point, and repeat, you still have to ask what set everything in motion, where did the mass and energy come from.  Same with the idea that there was a rip in the fabric of space-time, and our universe bled in from a different one...  what started that universe?  Going back, it all boils down to something coming from nothing.  The universe exploded from nothing and created everything, the Creator came into existence out of nothing and created everything out of nothing.

I personally like a combined theory, where a being set everything in motion, where it created everything, and then gave everything the potential or desire to evolve and grow.  It doesn't really help anything because you're still with a being that came from nothing...  but then again, I really not try to think about it too much because I start thinking and write numerous lengthy paragraphs on the subject.  For example, what if this omnipotent being came into existence because we as a species created him ourselves?  What if, in our need for answers, our collective will gave life to this being?  This does create a paradox in that God created man, man creates god, god creates man.  Man created God to provide the answers, or more specifically, created God to provide the initial start of things, but then God turns around and creates man so that He can exist because of their beliefs...

...

God creates man, then expects man to believe in Him...  deities demand sacrifices and prayer and so many numerous ways to reinforce the belief in Them, even going so far as to provide a Hell and damnation, a sense of punishment, for those who don't believe.  Why?  Why must gods demand people to believe in them?  Why does man demand that level of... respect or fear?  It creates a power base.  People's belief creates a power base, the more people who believe, the more power that deity gains.  Without power, that being does not exist, without his existence we do not exist.

Along those lines, then that means that ANY intelligent life form we come across in the universe will look like us, human.  Why?  If we created God, if we created this being to justify our existence, we made Him into a shape or role that makes us comfortable...recognizable.  We've made God in our image, and in turn God makes us in His image.  So then, it stands to reason that, if we make God / God makes us, then any other alien life form would look like us because we want it so; if they don't look like us, God didn't make them because they aren't in His (our) image.  Then again, aliens would have their own god, created in their own image...

But all this is moot, because we'd then have to give reason to why gods are no longer with us.  Where are the miracles, the sightings of angels, the messengers?  The sky chariots, the pillars of flame?  Is it because we no longer believe?  Even the Church has stated that sections of the Bible should be viewed as allegory, as metaphor.  It is interesting to note that in each previous "big" religion, there was massive amounts of interaction, and then a dying off of the gods, only to be replaced by the next "big" religion" where there was massive amounts of interaction.

If this can't lead to a bigger discussion, I don't know what would!

2.  Eyes and sight.  I think eyes first evolved because it is a simple sense, all things considered.  At first, all it was needed for was to detect light / dark... light was good, warm, light was open and safe, whereas something dark covering you meant that you couldn't see or that something bigger was by you.  This helped you avoid being consumed by something bigger, or helped you move out of the cold (night).  

Other senses could be used for every other type of interaction.  At their basic levels: smell allowed for pheromones or musk to help identify mates (humans still have this sensory organ); taste allows us to know what we can or cannot eat; touch so we know if our environment is safe or dangerous.  

I'm not including hearing in this base level because I think hearing was more important than sight, that hearing allows us to know just as much about our environment than seeing.  Example:  people close their eyes and cock their heads when they are concentrating on something, they try to strain their ears to listen to the slightest sound instead of focusing with their eyes.

So, I propose that hearing was our primary sensory organ.  Whether the rudimentary eye picked up light or dark, you still needed to know what was around you, and that's where hearing came in, as it told you everything about your environment.  Heck, dolphins and bats still use hearing in this extent within their environments.

And that, I think, is where eye sight comes to play.  Dolphins don't use their sonar when they have their heads out of the water.  They can't, there's no medium for the sonar to travel.  If we had evolved from water life, we'd have had excellent hearing and base level sight because that's what we originally needed.  But, as we moved to land, our other senses had to "pick up" where the other left off...  something had to replace the role of hearing... and, because the other senses were already geared for a specific function, the weakest sense stepped up and evolved into the organ that gave us information about our environment.

Because life then developed into a visual based creature, it only stands to reason that life evolved to suit that need.  Scent, another "strong" sense, is influenced by the winds, isn't able to linger as it did in water... and so, life evolved to visually attract mates.  Some animals still rely on scent: you'll see them close their eyes and lift their heads when tracking something.  Taste is still viable because we can't see what is poison or bad.

Our eyesight didn't evolve into seeing thermal or infrared or anything else like that because our visual source, our visual "income" as it were", was influenced by the sun.  Our eyes developed using the most readily available source of sight, it took the easy way out.  Because our eyes were originally developed to sense between light and dark, it was only natural that they continue to evolve to go from light to shades of grey to base colors to full colors.  If we evolved in a low light / no light setting, or if our sun instead was of the lower quality star (I forget the star chart terminology), then maybe we'd see in a different spectrum.

So there, that's my understanding of sight.  To go further, as you have done, would require a discussion on attraction, and though that would make for a great discussion, falls outside the scope of this post.  Maybe the next one?  I leave that up to you, as this is your thread.