"James Brown" wrote:

Sometimes I think folk protest too much. Given the length of time it would
take by a process of unguided evolution for a single cell (coming in any
case from inanimate chemicals) to develop photosensitivity let alone be
part of such a complex item as an eye-ball - personally I find that a leap
of faith which neither satisfies at a scientific level nor at the level of
personal belief.

The way I look at it is that the suggested alternatives are even less
satisfying - *much* less satisfying, in fact, since they all require
something infinitely more unlikely than evolution - i.e. the prior existence
of an uncaused, uncreated intelligent entity (a 'creator'). If we find it
hard to believe that something as complex as a multicellular organism can
exist with entirely natural origins, then we should probably regard it as
completely impossible that an intelligent entity could exist with no origin
whatsoever.