Ok, I’d like a serious answer to the “woodpecker problem”.
“If the woodpecker devoloped a strong beak first, it would scramble its own brains with the force of its strike. If it developed its head support (whatever it is) first, it would have broken off its beak with the force of its strike.”
I do know that at least some biologists/paleontologists are drifting from the classic Darwinian/incremental evolution explanation, but is this not sort of a knife in the back of the theory? How does the classic Darwinian explain that one? For that matter, how does any evolutionist?