Obviously - yes, because all grow with individuals from childhood to adulthood. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I have done no such thing. The Lazy Designer theory was not born out of incredulity, it was born out of observation. Yeah, you've clearly missed the point I was making. Yes, you're abusing the term. Now you're backpeddling because you've realized just how ridiculous some of what you're suggesting sounds. My point was that if your example requires co-evolution of all of these multiple independent factors, than so does the growth of a newborn to adulthood, because that's all we're talking about here - a few individuals whos necks grew for longer than was 'average' (a genetically controled trait) gained a slight advantage, and passed that trait along. The point that I was making was that "How did the nerves in the neck, the veins in the neck, the muscles in the neck, and the lymphatic system keep up with the growth of the neck" has the same answer as it does when an individual grows from being a newborn to adulthood. You want me to link you up with evidence that proves that a giraffes neck grows between childhood and adulthood? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Trolling again? I explained what I meant. There was no faith in anything I said, only inference and deduction. It is implicit in your assertions, and in your reply, yes. NO! I infer that it might have been. I aknowledge the possibility that it might have been. There is a huge difference. This is an assumption, it's also a strawman hypothesis. For a start off, you're assuming that it appeared in it's current form, I am not. You're assuming it appeared able to withstand the forces it currently withstands, I am not. You're also assuming that it was capable of withstanding all of the forces it was subjected to in its original form, I am not. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Again, this is a misrepresentation of what I said. I've already given you a couple. Yes you do. You presume that it would have led to problematically low bloodflow in the legs, for example. No it isn't. Yeah, remember the part of the conversation where I suggested it was a pre-existing feature for other purposes that evolution co-opted? I suggested it as a p[ossibility, nothing more. Context, please. We're talking about Giraffes, and girraffes only at this point. I wasn't saying that co-evoilution doesn't occur, only that this isn't an example of it. Then seek knowledge, not religous tales told around a campfire. Deliberatness is irrelevant. So go out and measure the neck lengths of a bunch of giraffes. Who said it was neccessarily a Hox gene that was responsible for it? I didn't - I simply made the point that mutations in single genes can have wide ranging effects on morphology. The Hox genes are simply one example of that - they're relevant, because they control the segmentation of the spinal colum, but they're not the only factor affecting the growth of the neck. Then perhaps you should re-examine the language you use, and avoid phrases like "I don't believe..." I'd use a smiley here, but i've reached my limit already. Which one do you think? And you wonder why people on this forum think you're a creationist troll... Yes. I also said that I was speculating on the basis of evidence and deductive logic - take a moment to think about it. No. Good god man. I'm telling you that my speculation produces testable predictions. By definition that makes it falsafiable. I have, or at least dmeonstrated methods by which it sould be - you just haven't understood that, either through genuine ignorance, or because you have a hidden agenda, my money is on teh second, compounded by the first.