Already addressed in a previous post. When you have a fish that evolves into something that is not a fish and more complex than a fish, call me. Otherwise, you're no different than that street preacher standing on the corner with the sign that says, "The End is Near."
Except his sign may be more correct than your theory.
Define "not a fish".
Define "more complex than a fish".
I note that you've given up on the "no observed speciation" lie, and now you've moved on to a different creationist canard.
Hmmm, what previously made observations does your street-preacher's sign confirm? What successful predictions have been made using it? What hypothetical observations would falsify it? If you have sensible answers to those questions then you can rate the preacher's sign as a theory. Until then it is just a baseless assertion, unlike scientific theories such as the theory of evolution.