Aineo: I posted a basic summary off the problem (which has never been shown as anything other than fact by a Creationist crowd) and wanted your input on why the eye was like that in both creatures. The science isn't any simpler than I can make it and no book is going to change the basic flaws in the systems, regardless of how much to recommend it. Unless that book shows every marine biologist and optical specialist to be wrong about the basic structure of these two eyes, then there isn't anything it is useful for here. We are not discussing the evolution of such an organ here.
First I would like your definition of a "creationist" since the books I have read were not from CRI. If your definition of "creationist" is any scientist who is a Christian then Galileo and Newton are in that group.
BTW, if you are going to discount a book without at least reading it then you are demonstrating your prejudices outweigh your search for truth and knowledge.
Pechenik indicates that although cephalopods can perceive shape, light intensity, and texture, they lack many of the advantages of an inverted retina, such as the ability to perceive small details.21 The visual system of the cephalopods is designed very differently than the inverted eye in other ways to enable them to function in their dark, water world. They can see only in black and white and have a narrow range of vision compared to humans. Their photoreceptor cell population is composed of only rods, and they contain a mere twenty million retina receptor cells compared to 126 million in humans.22 The rod’s outer segments contain rhodopsin pigment that has a maximum absorption in the blue-green part of the spectrum (475 nm), which is the predominant color in their environment. Photons change the rhodopsin to metarhodopsin and no further breakdown nor bleaching occurs.23
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2000/PSCF3-00Bergman.html
What you seem to want to ignore is the
why cephelopod and human eyes differ.