Even Giraffes fail to prove Darwinianism

The Giraffe has long been an "obvious" example of natural selection pressure that would cause large changes in a species. Yet when the actual scientific studies come out, they are not so obvious. Successive small changes cannot explain the Giraffe.

Accordingly, the paper has been celebrated as the neo-Darwinian solution to the
problems of the origin of the giraffe by natural selection in the popular press and
elsewhere (for some examples see the links below) – as if all questions have now
been answered in agreement with the dictum that "all of biology rests on the
foundation of neo-Darwinism, drawing on the principles of population biology and
molecular genetics" (G. T. Joyce in Nature 346, p. 806, 1990). However, the article
does not address any of the key problems discussed at length in our two papers
(2006, 2007) on The Evolution of Long-Necked Giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) -
What do we really know?
First to mention some details (not to criticize the authors Cameron and du Toit on
the majority of the following points, but their readers and commentators who, in theirenthusiasm for Darwin and natural selection, seem to have overlooked the fact thatthe writers did not speak about the following topics):

1. The paper by Cameron and du Toit does not address any of the problems
presented by the fossil record (see Part 1 and several chapters and notes of Part 2
above, especially pp. 6-10, 23-24, 33-47, 50-51, 54, 58-61)

2. It does not address any of the problems that natural selection has to explain
concerning the prominent sexual dimorphism of Giraffa camelopardalis, not to
mention the special requirements of young animals (see summary and introduction
above as well as pp. 20-22, 29-32, 62).

3. It does not address any of the anatomical or physiological questions and
problems discussed in detail in our two papers. No word on the number of vertebrae
(see pp. 13-18 above), no word on synorganization or coadaptation (Part 1, pp. 4, 8-
10, 23-24, Part 2, pp. 18-20, 26, 52-54, 65, 66, 69, 70, 75, 77). No word on the points
addressed on p. 26 of this paper (to repeat):
(a) the duplication of a neck vertebra, as well as the many related specific anatomical structures discussed above by
Solounias… (b) the especially muscular esophagus (ruminator), (c) the various adaptations of the heart, (d) the muscular
arteries, (e) the complicated system of valves, (f) the special structures of the rete mirabile (system of blood-storing
arteries at the brain base), (g) the „coordinated system of blood pressure controls“ (for, among other things, the
enormously high blood pressure), … (h) „The capillaries that reach the surface are extremely small, and (i) the red
blood cells are about one-third the size of their human counterparts, making capillary passage possible“; (j) the precisely
coordinated lengths, strengths and functionality of the skeletal, muscular and nervous systems; (k) the efficient „large
lungs“ (l) „the thick skin, which is tightly stretched over the body and which functions like the anti-gravity suit
worn by pilots of fast aircraft“.

4. Moreover, the paper by Cameron and du Toit does not address any of the genetic
questions, i.e. random 'macromutations' vs. an almost infinite number of accidental
'micromutations' (pp. 18-20, 25-27).

5. Apart from the missing question of sexual dimorphism, neither does the article
address the essential problem of the theory of natural selection for the origin of the
giraffes in general: i.e. the behaviour of the giraffe and "the survival of the fittest"
under extreme food shortages, especially with regard to the young animals again
(remember Mitchell and Skinner quoted p. 29 of the present paper):
“While dependence on leguminous browse seems essential, the idea that tallness enables exploitation of food sources that are beyond the reach of competitors such as bovids, is unlikely to be true. Pincher (1949) made one of the first objections to this hypothesis. He indicated that a Darwinian dearth severe, long-lasting enough, and/or frequent enough for natural selection to operate to produce a long neck, would cause the recurrent wastage of young giraffes, and would thus lead to extinction of the species rather than its evolution.”

As it turns out, wild Giraffes largely spend their time eating lower vegetation where they do compete with shorter animals. Those interested in the gritty details of this examination can find it here.