Your strange quote of no-one in particular looks like somebody's wish-dream. Possibly I misread somebody's demand for a particular broomstick. (One targeted at a known gap, as if one gap anywhere makes all the evidence we do have go away.) However, I don't recall the incident. I do happen to recall that the earliest (Eocene) bat does have a remarkably long tail. This is not a feature of modern bats, but it (along with the rest of the clues) does point to an arboreal insectivore heritage.
As this site notes, for a tiny, light-boned forest animal to have a spotty record of preservation is no shock.
If you are willing to admit the possibility that an Intelligent Designer directly-created the First Living Cell... then why not all of them?
Because of all the evidence for common descent. And, no "common design" does not cover all of it equally well. I call your attention especially to the sections on redundant pseudogenes and endogenous retroviruses under Part 4. Of course, reading and absorbing that might interfere with the 20-second response latency preferred by Holy Warriors on these threads.
Your 'evidence' for common descent is startlingly similar to the 'evidence' for the hazards of second hand smoke; it consists entirely of opinion, and 'study' to gloss over the thousands of chasms that cannot be bridged by anything but assumption, such as Punctuated Equilibrium.