New structures would be useless until fully developed (Talk.Origins)

Claim CB921:

New structures or organs would not develop incrementally because they would not function until fully developed. For example, what use is half an eye?

Source:
 * Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pg. 53.

CreationWiki response:

While six-year-olds do not have the strength and agility of adults their legs have all their functional parts, all they need is growth. The claim uses the word "new". Evolution says that new structures or organs develop incrementally, by means of beneficial mutations followed by selection. Anything new, whether lungs, photosynthesis, legs or eyes, must have developed gradually, mutation by mutation, each one being selected and transferred to the general population. The point is that many organs and structures are difficult to develop incrementally so that each step is useful for the organism. That usefulness is the point of "fully developed". A child's leg has all the bones, muscles, ligaments and blood vessels in place as well as whatever neural hard wiring is necessary in the brain. All of that would need to develop in a gradual manner per normal evolutionary doctrine. There really is a problem with organs that are not fully functional in the sense that they are not useful. Organs "in process of development" would have some structures, but other necessary structures would not yet have developed which would make the whole useful.

In context, when Morris said “fully developed” he clearly meant developed to functionality. All of the examples given above are just different types of fully functional eyes.