There are innumerable descriptions and definitions of theistic evolution. How things are phrased matters a lot.
“The human eye is a well-tread [sic] example of how evolution can produce a clunky design,” writes Professor Lents.
Vertebrate eyes work reasonably well, Richard Dawkins conceded, but “it is the principle of the thing that would offend any tidy-minded engineer!”
University of Chicago evolutionist Jerry Coyne suffers from cognitive dissonance.
The human eye is for seeing, whether or not it has any effect on genetics. However, this common-sense view has a problem.