But those who wonder why there aren't a myriad of transitionals along every stage of development have a fair point too, and this has caused evos to consider things like PE.
And there are problems with making things stand on the fossil record. The very nature of it leads to misassumptions and uncertainties. Did Homo sapien descend from Homo erectus or Homo ergaster? Australopithecus afarensis or Australopithecus africanus? And it's not anti-science to say none of the above.
The Glenn Morton link is a case in point. Note in his essay he says "While this is widely stated by apologists and paleontologists, it is actually an assumption not borne out by the data." IOW, the Cambrian explosion claim is accepted by the scientific establishment and it's something Morton is challenging. So you go, Glenn.
It's anti-science to make flat-out assertions without evidence to back them up. "None of the above" is very hard to reconcile with the evidence, since, as has been pointed out before, the creationists themselves disagree whether some of these guys are in the "non-human ape baramin" or the "human baramin". If nothing else, that establishes that H. erectus, H. ergaster, et al, are neither clearly non-human nor clearly human.