The physiology paragraph says ostriches “use their neck to hide within the sand”. Put that premise aside for a second and look at the job assigned to each neck. One long neck supposedly gets the animal down into cover. The other is explained as a way of reaching up.
Whenever I ask why a giraffe needs that much neck, I get told that long necks exist in nature. Fine. Why does the comparison stop just before the behavior?
There is another jump here. A neck being capable of a movement and an animal using that movement to hide are separate claims. Which one is the alleged omission?
That is why I find this objection stronger as a question about the explanation than as a test you could apply to a single picture. A picture can show a neck. It cannot show what somebody forgot to design.
the picture makes the giraffe look like the version that forgot to crouch. i would like to see the two animals compared at ground level instead of both posed upright.
The physiology paragraph says ostriches “use their neck to hide within the sand”. Put that premise aside for a second and look at the job assigned to each neck. One long neck supposedly gets the animal down into cover. The other is explained as a way of reaching up.
Whenever I ask why a giraffe needs that much neck, I get told that long necks exist in nature. Fine. Why does the comparison stop just before the behavior?
−+Collapse or expand reply by nailbrush
A similar part does not require identical behavior. You would have to say which feature makes hiding a necessary use of the neck.
−+Collapse or expand reply by flatlander
Then pointing at another long-necked animal does not explain this one. It just makes the silhouette feel less exceptional.
−+Collapse or expand reply by mothproof
There is another jump here. A neck being capable of a movement and an animal using that movement to hide are separate claims. Which one is the alleged omission?
−+Collapse or expand reply by flatlander
The behavior. The paragraph says the fabrication neglected it. I am not asking somebody to find a hinge in the photograph.
−+Collapse or expand reply by cansleeve
That is why I find this objection stronger as a question about the explanation than as a test you could apply to a single picture. A picture can show a neck. It cannot show what somebody forgot to design.
−+Collapse or expand reply by mudlark
I am not conceding the ostrich premise yet. The picture and the sentence are being treated as though they establish the same thing.
−+Collapse or expand reply by windowseat
the picture makes the giraffe look like the version that forgot to crouch. i would like to see the two animals compared at ground level instead of both posed upright.