When an object is thrown at us, we instinctively try to move out of its path. Recently, there are new experimental studies which are showing designed capabilities that can react faster than the eye or brain. The studies were conducted by a team from the Canadian Institutes of Health and then published later in PNAS.
With damage to the visual cortex, scientists were amazed that the subject could still avoid obstacles in the way during hand-reach experiments. In order to find compelling evidence that these mechanisms can operate in ‘real-time’ there was a two second delay which would nullified an automated response but indicate direct input from primary visual cortex. So the subject even without knowing the presence of those obstacles scientists observe the subject still being able to detect the position and move accordingly.
The paper suggested without mentioning evolution…
“These findings have far-reaching implications, not only for our understanding of the time constraints under which different visual pathways operate, but also in relation to how these seemingly ‘primitive’ subcortical visual pathways can control complex everyday behavior without recourse to conscious vision…the results of the current study clearly indicate that we have to rethink the role of what are often considered primitive visual pathways in the mediation of complex motor behavior.“
In another study, New Scientist reports, the eye see trouble before the brain even notices! This is quite amazing discovery as eye cells can warn us of approaching danger without needing the brain’s help. Reporter Sanjida O’Connell of New Scientist suggests how this came about: “This ability may have evolved to speed escape from predators.”
A natural process in evolution doesn’t have a goal or a purpose which begins by random mutations. There is nothing physically connected with the reproductive system and experience for example, the animal didn’t sit there getting hit by objects which then caused it to produce an automated reaction for multiple interacting systems where it could avoid those objects. If a parent’s arm is removed, this doesn’t mean the parent’s off spring will be born without an arm or a defective arm as a result.
Reporter Sanjida O’Connell stepped way out of the bounds of science, but it’s not surprising to see no evolutionist call her on the speculation. I believe if her conclusion was supernatural rather than natural, then you would see an onslaught of outrage about her speculation. But this doesn’t detract from this new discovery as we marvel at the design of both the eye and the brain!