No it doesn't, not in the least. There's no reason at all why these features couldn't have developed, little by little, over time, in the millions of years during which fossils show "proto-giraffs" were relatively small.
Of course, I would agree that only when all of the pieces you describe were finally in place could giraffs begin to grow to their present size. And, according to the fossil record, that happend around a million years ago.
But here's what seem most important to me: your argument is to reject all of the physical evidence, and ask me instead to believe your non-evidence.
Sorry, pal, but that just makes no sense.
****No it doesn’t, not in the least. There’s no reason at all why these features couldn’t have developed, little by little, over time, in the millions of years during which fossils show “proto-giraffs” were relatively small.****
Another way of saying the above is.....”I can’t see the forest because all of these trees are in the way.”
The giraffe couldn’t have evolved those four parts over time, they all had to be there together. If even one was missing he’d have died off before he could have evolved further.
Your inability to process logic baffles me.
****But here’s what seem most important to me: your argument is to reject all of the physical evidence,****
What physical evidence? You mean bones? Who observed that again?
****and ask me instead to believe your non-evidence.****
And what was my non-evidence? Oh yeah...a description of the morphology of the giraffe that would require four specific parts to be there and functioning at the same time for the species to survive.
****Sorry, pal, but that just makes no sense.****
From the movie “Bull Durham”...Crash Davis speaking to Annie Savoy.....”Talkin’ to you is like talkin’ to a fungo”
I now know how Crash felt.