Someone dense wrote,

   Those best adapted to the environment survive to reproduce;
those who
fail to survive to reproduce, remove their DNA from the chain of
life.

   DNA is an embodiment of information but can in no way be
presumed to
be conscious of itself or of its role.

   later
   bliss -- C  O C O A  Powered... (at california dot com)

--      
bobbie sellers - a retired nurse in San Francisco

"It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of cocoa that the thoughts acquire speed,
the thighs acquire girth, the girth become a warning.
It is by theobromine alone I set my mind in motion."
   --from Someone else's Dune spoof ripped to my taste.

It doesn't get any such information.  The changes that occur in the DNA
are random (actually there are known places which are more likely to
mutate than others, so it isn't *entirely* random, but still, random
enough).

What happens is that if a physical trait develops that stops the
organism from reaching reproductive age, this mutation will not be
passed on.  However, if the mutation helps the organism reach
reproductive age, then it is more likely that the gene be passed on.

A nice example to consider is that of Sickle Cell Trait.  A small
change in the structure of haemoglobin causes the red cells to change
shape (and become sickle shaped instead of round) so they can't be
infected with malaria.  This means that in Africa, the sickle cell gene
will be much more common than in the West (and it is), since in Africa
if you don't have sickle cell trait you are quite likely to die from
malaria before you reach reproductive age.

    You have got it backwards . DNA mutations cause the giraffe's
neck to enlarge or shorten , and the enviornment selects which one
works and that animals lives longer and reproduces more kids , so the
longer neck wins .
    If the climate gets worse , the short necks will do better