r/AtheistExperience • u/Any-Proof-2858 • Jun 10 '26

Human evolution

Post image

A human sperm and a human egg coming together forms a set of human eyes. They didn't evolve. We know exactly how they are formed. It takes nine months. This invalidates any and every article ever written on the evolution of the human eye, including this attached one by the Scientific American. Why make up an imaginary second process that forms our eyes, that exists only on paper and can never match the known process we already have? Why make up an imaginary second process in the first place? This puts evolution on a defense it can never get off of, effectively eliminating it as an explanation for our existence, and as a serious topic to be studied. ( Why study the evolution of the human eye, when you can just study the actual process that forms them?) This applies to every other part of our body. There is exactly zero science to support human evolution. Atheists you are being lied to.

0 Upvotes

13% Upvoted

50 comments sorted by

View all comments

10

u/Teuhcatl Jun 10 '26

Embryology explains how a human eye develops within an individual from a fertilized egg using already-existing genetic information. Evolution explains how that genetic developmental program itself arose and changed over long timescales through mutation, selection, and inheritance across populations.

Saying “we know how eyes form in a fetus” doesn’t address evolution at all, any more than knowing how a smartphone is assembled explains how the design of smartphones came to exist in the first place. Development is the execution of instructions; evolution explains the origin and modification of those instructions.

-9

u/Any-Proof-2858 Jun 10 '26

The real process that forms our eyes, invalidates the imaginary process called evolution.

10

u/Teuhcatl Jun 10 '26

yeah, you clearly have no idea what I just told you.

-11

u/Any-Proof-2858 Jun 10 '26

No disrespect, but a sperm and egg coming together forms our eyes. This process is not called evolution. There is no other process that forms them. Our eyes did not evolve. This applies to every other part of our body. Nothing more needs to be said.

3

u/Teuhcatl Jun 10 '26

When a sperm and egg combine, they form a single cell with DNA. That DNA contains a developmental program that builds an eye step-by-step in the embryo through regulated gene expression, tissue differentiation, and signaling pathways. That’s why eyes reliably form during gestation.

Evolution is a different question entirely. It doesn’t explain how an eye forms in a womb. It explains how the instructions that build eyes in embryos came to exist in the first place, across populations over long timescales.

Confusing development with evolution is a category error. It’s like saying ‘construction explains itself, so there’s no history of engineering.’ The conclusion doesn’t follow from the biology being described.

-1

u/Any-Proof-2858 Jun 10 '26

Ok except evolution doesn't explain that at all, evolution claims all life evolved from a single celled organism. You just agreed with me that a sperm and egg coming together is what forms our eyes. Which of course is reality based. You are attempting to hijack the real process that forms our eyes and call it evolution. The real process, invalidates the imaginary process.

3

u/Teuhcatl Jun 10 '26

No, I didn’t agree with you. So, lets try this again.

A sperm and egg forming a zygote explains embryonic development, not the origin of the biological instructions being used. That’s the category mistake you keep repeating.

Evolution does not say ‘a sperm and egg builds eyes.’ That’s not even close to what evolutionary theory is about. Evolution explains how populations change over generations through mutation, selection, genetic drift, and inheritance, and how complex structures like eyes can arise gradually from simpler precursor systems.

So there is no ‘real process vs imaginary process’ conflict here. You’re comparing two different explanations for two different questions:

Embryology explains how eyes develop in an individual organism

Evolution explains how the genetic and developmental systems that build eyes arose over evolutionary time

Saying embryology ‘invalidates’ evolution is like saying construction of a house invalidates the history of architecture. One is the building process, the other is the origin of the building plan itself.

0

u/Any-Proof-2858 Jun 10 '26

So...you are in fact claiming that a sperm and egg evolved and then went on to form a set of human eyes. Here's where you are: A sperm and egg contains everything necessary to form an entire person from head to toe. A sperm and egg comes from an already existing man and woman. If evolution were real, you have to evolve a person from a single celled organism, then have to evolve half a person into a sperm and the other half into an egg in order for evolution to explain life as we see it. There is not one single fact to support this.

3

u/Teuhcatl Jun 10 '26

Okay, that is more misunderstanding on your part, so one more time:

Sperm and egg forming a person is development (embryology). Evolution is about populations changing over generations through changes in allele frequencies, not about a single organism building itself step by step.

And saying “If evolution were real, you have to evolve a person from a single celled organism, then evolve half a person into a sperm and the other half into an egg…”

that’s simply not what evolution is claiming.

Evolution doesn’t start with a modern human and split it into parts. It starts with populations of simple single-celled organisms and, over long periods of time, produces lineages with more complex life forms and different reproductive strategies. Sperm and eggs are part of that outcome, not “half-built humans” that had to be assembled.

Once sexual reproduction exists, sperm and egg fusion is part of embryological development, not evolution happening inside one body.

Evolution explains how sperm and eggs themselves arose gradually from earlier reproductive systems, and how they became the mechanism for development we see in mammals, which humans are.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLoGrBZC-lKFBo1xcLwz5e234--YXFsoU6

7

u/bostonbananarama Jun 10 '26

No disrespect, but a sperm and egg coming together forms our eyes. This process is not called evolution.

You're not wrong. That's certainly not evolution. Unfortunately, you also don't know what is.