Um, *what* "proves quite well" that fossils can't answer *which* "big questions" of evolution?
The question we are dealing with - the transformation from egg laying to live bearing is certainly a big question. Evolution is about descent is it not? Reproduction is central to descent is it not? Bones cannot answer the question as the shark example shows. They are all fish in every way yet their reproductive systems are completely different. So bones cannot answer the big questions of evolution.
That must mean creationism is true!
Yes and yes.
Bones cannot answer the question as the shark example shows.
Now you've gone wonky again.
And you might want to go reread the part where I explained to you how "bones" *can* shed light on questions like this.
They are all fish in every way yet their reproductive systems are completely different.
If you think they're "completely" different, you really haven't been paying attention.
So bones cannot answer the big questions of evolution.
Beware of vast overgeneralizations, they're never, ever, ever wrong in a trillion years...
Actually, "bones" can answer *many* of the "big questions in evolution". And they can shed light on this one. They just can't provide the entire answer on this particular issue all by themselves, you have to gather information from various sources.
I don't know why you think that's somehow vastly profound.