if it was left up to evolution chance would still be rolling the dice trying to glue together DNA. Take a close look at how complex

the operation of the human cell is.

Take a look at the crazy 'design' of the human eye, with its back-to-front retina, the blood vessels on the front of it, showing just how much chance is involved even in such allegedly 'designed' features. The element of chance lead to the octupus having a more rationally 'designed' eye, presumably because it evolved independently via a different sequence of steps. Whereas if everything had actually been designed by the same super-intelligent designer, there is no reason why our eye could not have been the right way round.

Our body is most definitely not exquitely designed, the 'complexity' is a sign of POOR design, since if everything was designed from scratch, it could have been much more elegant. Good design minimises the complexity, because that makes thing more failure prone. However the structure of living organisms is limited to patterns which can be derived by progressive modification of previous working 'designs', with lots of leftover bits which don't really make sense in the new one, like human 'tail-bones', the vestiges of rear limbs in whales bodies, and so on.

What drives evolution other then chance daretoknow?   A higher power??

BobSpence1, dude your not an octupus. And i believe that they live under the water... so wouldn't one want to compare something a little more in our target area.  Plus i believe the eye just wouldn't fit.  And did you say that i had a tail at one time because i had a tail bone?? 

magilum, "trying to" in the scenario is about random chance in which evolution is based on.

What drives evolution "Natural Selection" (not chance) and random mutation.  The only thing close to being chance would of had to come about with the first replicator, after that it is just a failure to replicate correctly.  So no evolution isn't chance.  Suggested reading on the subject, http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/chance/chance.html

You do not address the issue that the retina of the octopus eye is clearly better 'designed' than ours. It is quite definitely an eye, has the same functionality. Any size difference is also irrelevant - mammalian eyes share similar problems and cover a large range of size.

The fact that it lives underwater and has eight appendages is utterly irrelevant to the point, except to show that organisms that have evolved along very different paths, finding different ways to thrive, can stumble across various ways to solve the same 'problem' such as sight. Such an example so clearly fits the scenario of mutation/selection, where the massive usefulness for many 'lifestyles' of good vision has lead to strong selection pressures for eyes to have evolved independently several times. At the same time, the fact that evolution can only work thru successive small changes means that the details of the solutions will be different and show traces of that path taken.

We have a bone which is worse than useless, that makes absolutely no sense except as a vestigial remnant from our evolutionary past, where our distant ancestors did indeed have a tail - any other explanation makes so little sense in comparison, especially anything which assumes a priori that complex structures cannot arise from simpler ones, which leaves us with no ultimate explanation for anything.

EDIT - Double Post

Motley Crue - Helter Skelter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBMMCClIgTc

             Why confusion?  Why make believe ???

 [ "Morning" EDIT - the rock music is a method, I was sharing, as a way I combat my frustration, and even an answer to the religious zealot idol worshipers. Religion drives me nuts. "Rage against the machine" !!! ..... ]