The Washington times., 1920-12-26

One of the Most Successful Ex-
amples of Camouflage in the War.
A Ship IL Painted to Look Like
Several. The Submarine Observer
Whose Eyes Recorded Form Would
Have Better Chance to Penetrate
the Disguise Than One Who Was
Keener Upon Motion or Color.
trained to associate food with certain
colors N was found that they could dis
eliminate between red and both blue and
green. and also between yellow and green
although they are unable to differentiatt
between blue and yellow. All these expert
ments on the lower animals help to ex
plain the function Of sight In man, which
is u good deal of q puzzle.
The most interesting facts observed
with regard to mans eyes are that each
eve has q separate function, that different
parts OF the retina have different functions
and that one person sees color, another
sees form and another sees brightness
with greater clearness than another.
Students Of optics have hitherto believed
that a man perceives depth in a solid OBJ
1ect because he sees 1t with two eyes, and
that 1t would appear perfectly fiat IL seen
with one eye only. 1t has now been found
that depth perception Is not mainly func'
tion Of the combined eyes, but depends on
the fact that the retinal image OF each eye
has a certain thickness. positions within
which are sensed
The fusion of separate images is not
essential to stereoscopic vision, in which
we see an object in relief, and single eye
can obtain the stereoscopic vision. Pre-
yious experience is the most important
influence in giving US this form OF vision.
The function Of the retinal image in each
separate eye remains Independent. until
the very highest levels Of mental associa-
ton are reached. The combined power OF
Judgment, experience and other factors is
more important in giving us an image.
with all It's relations, than the simple
binocular mechanism.
The impression produced on the brain
depends on whether the mechanism Of the
retina Is stronger to perceive color, form
or brightness, and finally in the power Of
the higher mental centres to put together
the whole image.
This explains why two witnesses who
see exactly the same scene retain very
different impressions OF 1t. There have
been innumerable cases in the law courts
IN which several witnesses who saw ex-
actly the same scene differed radically
In their statements concerning what they
saw. In many cases these witnesses were
perfectly honest or without interest In mis-
representing what they saw. Judges and
lawyers have for centuries been entirely
unable to explain these extraordinary dis
crepancies.
Now everything appears clear in the
light of scientific investigation. One mans
retina is stronger in the part that records
color; another in the part that records
brightness; another in the part that per-
ceives form. Then. quite outside that, the
higher brain centres do not necessarily
perceive the whole image that is thrown
on the retina, but only those parts In which
the person is interested.
The same peculiarities of our eyesight
may account for the many differences In
the reports OF the same events in the four
Gospels, all written by apostles who must
have witnessed them or heard Of them from
eye-witnesses. An illustration Of such
variations is to be found in the references
in the Gospels to the transformation OF
the Saviour. Three Of the evangelists, st
Matthew, St. Mark and ST. Luke, report
this impressive occurrence but st. John,
who appears to have witnessed 1t, does not
mention It. st. Matthew (chapter xviii
says:
"And after six days Jesus taketh Peter,
James and John his brother, and bringeth
them up into an high mountain apart,
And was TRANSPORTED before them: and
his face did shine as the sun, and his raj
ment was white as the light"
Why did not st. John observe and record
that extraordinary occurrence? May 1t
not have been because his perception for
brightness, as the scientists express II, was
less acute than that Of the other apostles?
On the other hand, In the four accounts
Of the crucifixion in the Gospels st. John
alone mentions the remarkable fact OF the
Roman soldier striking the Saviour with
spear:
But one OF the soldiers with a spear
pierced his side, and forthwith came there
out blood and water"
This perhaps may be explained by the
fact that st. John had a quicker eye for
movement and contour In a vast confused
scene than the other apostles, although his
retinal centre for brightness may have been
less acute than theirs.
These are two conspicuous illustrations
OF important points which are mentioned
by one evangelist and not by another.
There are many others OF more or less Inn
portance which have long been subject
OF discussion and controversy among Bib