Retreating, are you? In Darwin's day, the fossil record was a tiny fraction of what we have now. Darwin was unable to point to that many examples of transitional forms. He nevertheless predicted that various forms interconnecting the tree of life must have existed at one time and are thus liable to be found as fossils. Other forms which make no historical sense (mammal-arthropod, bird-amphibian) should never be found.
Immediately, the scoffers staked out the holes in the fossil record as proof of holes in the history of life itself. That's what you're still doing today. But since 1859, Darwin has been repeatedly vindicated while your ground has shrunk to nothing.
What part of that statement [The fossil record should be almost nothing but transitions] do you not understand?
You only just retreated to this position in your last few posts. Rather than trying to make the evidence I've shown you go away, you're pretending it's not enough for you. Where have I failed to understand you? No one will ever bring you enough broomsticks, or the right broomstick. It is the hollowest of mockeries, the most patent of falsehoods, to claim that there is some lack in the physical evidence which prevents you from changing your mind. You have repeatedly shown yourself so ignorant of the state of the evidence that it would be impossible to justify your having a well-formed opinion on evolution at all.
Do you seriously imagine anyone is fooled? Can you even ask yourself how this looks to someone uninvolved following this conversation, if such an easily-amused person there be?
Now, at any rate, you're reduced to claiming that you know better than evolutionists what the implications of the theory of evolution actually are. As I mentioned, Darwin indeed wondered aloud where the transitionals are and predicted that they would turn up. I believe I have also mentioned now that they have done so in impressive numbers.
It is creation science, not real science, to stay stuck in the late 19th century for the sake of tactical convenience in arguing before an audience of presumed suckers.
At last, a true statement from Vade! Problem is though that even though we have 100 times more fossils than in Darwin's day, the gaps - where the biggest transitions supposedly occurred have in no way been filled.
Evolution being gradual, the greatest evidence should come where the biggest transitions have occurred. The biggest and most important transition - from reptiles to mammals - there is absolutely no evidence for. The supposed descent of man from monkeys has been forcibly revised and pushed back to times where there is no evidence with each new discovery. Evolutionists complain that their opponents make much of the gaps, however it is the evolutionists who try to fill the gaps with rhetoric instead of facts and exploit the gaps as evidence for their theory! They also indulge in a tremendous amount of double talk postulating (often in the same paragraph) that the fossils prove evolution and that they have not found yet the fossils which prove evolution.