False premise, the tree could not live without the dodo, therefore it couldn’t have existed before the dodo.
Two errors, #1 the tree can live with any other creature whose digestive tract thins the shells, (the example of the American Turkey is given in this very article!) error #2 the assumption that the early trees had thick shells (They may well have, or they may have needed to develop progressively thicker shells when their fruit eaters started experimenting with gravel filled gizzards)
Don’t question your religious blogger overlords.
yes. only valid conclusion is that the Dodo was the LAST (until the Turkey was introduced) creature to have a symbiotic relationship with the tree.
“Two errors, #1 the tree can live with any other creature whose digestive tract thins the shells, (the example of the American Turkey is given in this very article!)”
Theoretically, but given the tree has a limited range on an isolated island, you’d need to find actual examples of another creature who could fill that role who also lived in the same narrow range that the tree was found in. We can’t just assume that there actually was any other such creature who could have filled the role before the dodo came along.
“error #2 the assumption that the early trees had thick shells”
Yes, that is a legitimate weakness in their argument.