Is The Inverted Retina A Product Of Chance?

The human eye contains a retina – a membrane with approximately 120 million cells called photoreceptors, which absorb light rays and convert them into electric signals. Our brain interprets these signals as visual images. An evolutionist has contended that where the retina is placed in the eyes of vertebrates, creatures with a backbone, proves that the eye had no designer. Is these what you believe?

Consider this: The retina of vertebrates is inverted, placing the photoreceptors at the back of the retina. To reach them, light must pass through several layers of cells. According to the evolutionary biologists Kenneth Miller, “this arrangement scatters the light, making our vision less detailed than it might be.”

Evolutionists thus claimed that the inverted retina is evidence of poor design – really, no design. One scientist even described it as a functionally stupid upside-down orientation. However, further research reveals that the photoreceptors of the inverted retina are ideally placed next to the pigment epithelium – a cell layer that provides oxygen and nutrients vital to keen sight. If the pigment epithelium tissue were placed in front of the retina, sight would be seriously compromised, wrote biologist Jerry Bergman and ophthalmologist Joseph Calkins.

The inverted retina is especially advantageous for vertebrates with small eyes. It says professor Ronald Kroger of the University of Lund, Sweden; “Between the lens of the eye and the photoreceptors, there must be a certain distance to get a sharp image. Having this space filled with nerve cells means an important saving of space for the vertebrates.”

Additionally, with the nerve cells of the retina tightly packed and close to the photoreceptor, analysis of visual information is fast and reliable.

What do you think? Is the inverted retina an inferior structure, a product of mere chance? Or was it designed by a great and intelligence designer?