Have You Seen A Llamas Eye

The iris of llamas is unique due to structures called “iridic granules“. These are dark lumpy masses coming off the iris at the top and bottom of the pupil. They providing shade to the eye.

Llamas also do not have a tapetum or what you would know as that glow you see when headlights shine into an animals eyes at night.

  • Llamas have three eyelids
  • Tear production in llamas also has three layers
    • a deep mucous layer
    • a middle aqueous (fluid) layer
    • an outer oil layer

The mucous layer has antibacterial capabilities.

Categories: Nature Beyond NormalTags:


  1. How awesome is that !

    Liked by 2 people

  2. We rented a house for the week on Sequim Bay and took the kids to the Olympic Game Farm. Wound up feeding these roaming llamas they have on the property. They were sticking their heads all the way in the car—bossy bossy creatures! I’ve seen those eyes from mere inches. Interesting. Wonder why in evolution they needed eyes like that?

    Liked by 1 person

    • The eyes are designed to protect them from bright light.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Camels also have strange eyes.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Interesting, I will review, thanks.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I believe it will let you post two links at a time without waiting for me to approve it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I read that just now. My comment is in moderation. Ridiculous. Just goes to show the value of belief. Lock step shoehorning?


      • I’ve always found the argument between creationism and evolution to be an interesting struggle but not one of truthful value.

        Evolution speaks nothing about the origin of existence or life, and it has never claimed to know. So it has literally never been at odds with creationism.

        Creationism has never spoken against evolution in any text from any religion. There is only mention that things were created, not how they were created.

        But I am confident that this struggle will continue to thrive with you and Jim at odds with each other for a short time.

        In the end no living human has ever witnessed via science or by faith the creation of existence and the origin of life as we know it.

        But I do look forward to your 3 articles and your other blog that I have not seen.

        Liked by 1 person

        • “So it has literally never been at odds with creationism” – not true. Evolution claims that earth, the universe, space, all life on earth was created over millions of years through slow progression whilst creation teaches that earth, the universe, space and all life of earth was created over a period of six days. Read Genesis 1. Yah/God just spoke, commanding existence, and it came to be. So, yes, creationism does teach how life, earth, the universe, and all of space came about and how long.
          You only have to look around to see evidence of Yah/God and evidence that we were created by an intelligent being. There is plenty of evidence for creation and Yah/God. There isn’t evidence for evolution.
          What other blog are you talking about? I have two blogs – “Racheal’s Novels” and “miscellaneousoddity” both of which you are following.


          • You stated — “Evolution claims that earth, the universe, space, all life on earth was created over millions of years through slow progression”

            My response — Point of fact: You will not be able to find any literature on Earth that states that evolution claims to know the origin of the planet Earth. I challenge you to show me even one example.

            There is also no evolutionary literature that has ever claimed any knowledge of the origin the universe. I challenge you to provide even one example.

            Evolution does not even claim to know how life came into existence. I challenge you to point to any evolutionary claim that states to know the origin of life.

            Evolution only has one claim: That existing life changes over time through mutation. It has never claimed to know more than that. I challenge you to prove me wrong.


            • Evolution teaches that mutations are a dominant mechanism for pond-scum-to-people evolution.
              Mutations are primarily permanent changes in the DNA strand. DNA is basically the containers where all the information for the bodies are stored. In humans, the DNA consists of around 3 billion base pairs – two strands which forms a double helix. In sexual reproduction, one set of chromosomes (which are big segments of DNA) comes from the mum and one set from the father. In asexual reproduction, the DNA is completely copied and then passed along when the organism splits.
              With mutations, they permanently change something in the DNA, which sometimes is helpful and carries new information, but sometimes doesn’t and is just a load of junk.
              Evolution teaches that over time, by natural causes, nonliving chemicals gave rise to a living cell. Then, these single-celled life form gave rise to more advanced and complex life forms. Over millions of years (yes, evolution does teach that), increase in information was caused by mutations and natural selection, creating all the life forms we see today. That means there has to be a GAIN in information from the mutations. Now, while there are some cases of mutations giving new information, that there is sometimes a gain, and that would need to continue for the heart, kidneys, lungs, etc., to develop. But for the evolution’s lesson on mutations to be true, there would have to be BILLIONS of them. The fact of the matter is, we don’t see this in nature, nor do we observe it. We see the opposite – organisms LOSING information. They are changing, but in the wrong direction! How can a lose be a gain?


              • You are describing changes in existing life forms not how life began.

                There is no evolutionary process for the origin of life, the earth or the universe.

                Evolution is not the science of origins, it only studies change.

                Share your reference and prove me wrong.


            • Yes, evolution IS TAUGHT AS HOW WE CAME ABOUT. Read about evolution – that is what they are saying.


          • You stated — “What other blog are you talking about? I have two blogs – “Racheal’s Novels” and “miscellaneousoddity” both of which you are following.”

            My response — I only learned about “miscellaneousoddity” in te last hour or so and started following then.

            Liked by 1 person

          • You stated — “evidence that we were created by an intelligent being”

            My response — As a Christian I would agree but to be factually correct there is no way to prove that God did not create existence.

            The argument of creation vs evolution has never been designed to prove or disprove God. It is only designed to prove or disprove the timeline of all life on Earth.

            Liked by 1 person

          • You stated – “life of earth was created over a period of six days”

            My response – Sure six days but we can’t ignore the mystery of God in respect to those days. You only know that it was done in six days, you do not know, as a fact, how it was done within those days. The process God used was not revealed, only the time frame. Evolution only attempts to document the process not the origin.


        • The claims of evolution ARE at direct odds with creationism – at least, Biblical Creationism. The Bible teaches that God made everything – EVERYTHING – in 6 days, and that the earth is approximately 6000 years old. Evolution, on the other hand, teaches that the earth is billions of years old, and that things gradually evolved over millions of years.
          Also, the ORDER things were created in in Genesis is irreconcilably different from evolution – for instance, according to evolution, birds evolved (or at least came after) dinosaurs, whereas the Bible teaches that birds were created a full day BEFORE the land animals, which included the dinosaurs that birds supposedly descend from (or at least came after).

          Liked by 1 person

          • You stated — “The claims of evolution ARE at direct odds with creationism ”

            My response — Where in evolution does it state that God did not create everything?

            Where in the Bible does it state how God created everything?

            The how is the most important part of our observation. Until recently we didn’t even know that time was different in different places due to gravity. This alone is a game changer for what a day is.


            • Read Genesis 1. It says 6 DAYS (with the mention of “evening and morning” constituting the day, ruling out the interpretation that “day” here means “indefinite time period”). It simply said that He created them – 6000 YEARS AGO, NOT MILLIONS – and that they were “very good” from the start – NOT in need of improvement. So, unless you think that animals evolved in a matter of HOURS – or in just a few thousand years – it’s simply impossible. Plus, how do you reconcile the obvious differences with the evolutionary model of who evolved from who, versus the Biblical record of the order they were created in? The Hebrew word for day CAN mean a longer period of time, but in Genesis 1, it clearly states “the evening and the morning were the ___ day” AND it was the model for our 7-day week (Exodus 20); quite clearly 24-hour days, not 2400-hour days (LOL). AND gravitational time dilation is EXTREMELY small – measured in NANOSECONDS – and CAN NOT turn a day into a thousand years.
              And then of course there’s the question of how does an animal “evolve”? Is it even possible? (I’m not referring to microevolution, where viruses mutate, and there is some variation WITHIN a species; I’m referring to MACROEVOLUTION, aka apes to man, pond scum to you and I, etc.)
              Quite simply: animals don’t evolve. It’s never been observed, or in any way demonstrated. Parents pass on their species genetic traits to their offspring – the offspring don’t magically turn into “new” offspring (and throwing time into the mix doesn’t make it any more possible). The main argument is mutations – but, that simply fails to work. Mutations are almost always LOSS of information that is normally DAMAGING to the animal. Simply put: new-information-added-beneficial mutations don’t occur on nearly a big enough scale to support evolution.


            • I’m interested in your opinion on a subject I’ve recently started looking into (and you’re one of at best two persons I feel comfortable discussing it with – what with your being open to unconventional ideas and all).
              What do you think of the married Jesus theory?


  3. Reblogged this on miscellaneousoddity and commented:
    This is fascinating!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I did not know! Well done Lander!!

    Liked by 1 person

I want to hear what you have to say

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: