I am exceedingly greatful for your #466 post, and I have taken no offense from your earlier remarks. I am quite aware that I'm ignorant of many things. The further I went in my education, the more I learned that the less I knew. I have been able to adjust my "Faith" with respect to the concept of "Evolution" (not exactly they way I want to state this, but I believe you understand my meaning). I in no way meant to claim that evolution is not a viable construct, but was inquiring as to where in the fossil record exists those transitionals which would fully explain the theory.
I paid no attention to those who would equate evolution with socialism or Hitlerism. Evolution is an legitimate attempt to explain much that is as yet unexplainable in full, and I realize this. I also know there are people who make their living in the "sciences" who also have a "Faith in the Lord". One of my Professors is in that mold. He explained his position on both, which included an acknowledgement that evolution as a theory has many flaws as well as validity. It is not a complete theory, and perhaps will never be. I have no axe to grind, and an interested in learning new things. But people who put before me that which I've already been exposed to and say "see, there it is" aren't very convincing when I wasn't convinced the first time around (in the courses I took). When my Prof was unable to agree with the evols that there is evidence of one animal becoming a different animal based on the current fossil record, well, then how am I to say it is so? Reason suggests that the fossil record would have more transitionals than what has presently been found that would show more of the evolutionary changes from one to another subspecies or species. But, no-one has found those transitionals as yet. When they do, then I'll have more evidence to derive a different perspective.
I do sense you're honest in your desire to learn more about this subject.
If you indeed do the research, though, I think you'll find that there's a lot more out there than you think, not just with regard to transitional fossils, but more especially genetic evidence. I'm not just talking resemblences in genetic codes, but specific places where encoding errors and evidence for specific mutations being passed down; as well as very specific predictions of genetic data, in some cases leading to specific predictions of what sort of fossils from what era would be found, and where.
This is tough stuff to wrap your brain around, I know, (I'm certainly no expert; when it comes to this subject, I'm a layperson, just like yourself, with a bit of personal interest in the subject) - but I do know that there have been leaps and bounds in the subject made in the last couple decades.
Unfortunately, none of it's anything one can learn in just a few minutes; I encourage you keep learning about this fascinating field, and just to keep alert for websites & other sources who are engaged in apologetics as opposed to science. Best of luck, and hope that we can avoid coming to differences over what can indeed be a touchy subject.