The Sense of Sight

my video 4

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• video

[xXxAhmedTarekxXx]

1:12 Ouch !!

[maria80153]

im going to fail my optics final

[Dirtfire]

@Dirtfire many birds are just the opposite. They have far more cones vs. rods than we do, giving, say, an eagle far superior day-vision. They even have a 4th type of cone that senses ultraviolet light (and thus any mixture of it and other colors), giving them the ability to see far more colors that are invisible to us.

Their night-vision is far worse than ours, but then they don't need to see at night --unless we're talking about night-owls, which again have far more rods vs. cones than we do.

[Dirtfire]

@falixxxxx you're right that the tapetum lucidum (which I'd never have been able to spell if you hadn't spelled it) is part of the reason why cats and other animals have great night-vision. The bigger reason is that they have many more rods vs cones than we humans do. The video's description of rods and cones is correct.

cats and dogs have 2 types of cones (blue and greenish/yellowish) whereas humans have a third type -red. Cats can't differentiate red/green/yellow and have poor day-vision.

[senorpajarito]

@JackHL There is a huge body of evidence that demonstrates the validity of natural selection and the evolution of organisms from unicellular to multicellular. Sedimentary rock is layed down over time. The older the layer, the deeper in the ground it is. We have evidence of fossilized single celled organisms in the deep layers, and each layer going up (getting younger) is inhabited by more and more complex multicullular organisms. The fossil record, while containing some gaps, is very clear.

[egokick]

@JackHL You have miss understood what I was saying, I am not trying to claim that theories should not compete and that debate/argument is pointless (quite the opposite), I am merely claiming that ID makes such contradictory claims on the surface with errors like the one I pointed out above, that it is unnecessary to delve in to the details in order to discount ID as a valid theory (because it is contradictory). The age of the two theories is also completely irrelevant as to their truth value.

[JackHL]

@egokick Both evolution and Intelligent design are equally unprovable. Evolution is a very young theory with a few natural existences that could point to it's validity if you try hard enough. Likewise, Intelligent Design is a very OLD theory with a few natural existences that could point to it's validity if you try hard enough. Your right about the pointlessness of argument despite your bias. Either way, the world will be a better place if we focus on the future, the past is beyond our reach.

[egokick]

@JackHL your argument is that the eye is improbable to have came about naturally due to its complexity. God is infinitely more complex than an eye, therefore god is infinitely more improbable to exist than the eye.

People need not waste their time arguing about the specifics of evolution if they are to take 5 seconds and examine the utter ridiculousness of your argument. There may be valid criticisms of evolution out there, but shouting hurr durr, god did it, is not one of them.

[pradheepan]

@win2rgirl :- it is because the lens form upside dowm image and l8r our brain modifies it to normal

[falixxxxx]

Cats dogs and many other mammals can see better than we can because they have a reflective layer in the back of their eyes called a tapetum lucidum.

Not because they "open up further" as the video states.