[ol painless]

Actually many evolutionist agree with us creationist on this point.

University of Oklahoma paleontologist Dave Kitts:

'Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of “seeing” evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of “gaps” in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them….' (Kitts, David G. (1974), “Paleontology and Evolutionary Theory,” Evolution, 28:458-472, September)

[VadeRetro]

Actually many evolutionist agree with us creationist on this point. [Followed by the usual quote-science manure.]

For one thing, you need to learn a better form of argument.

For another thing, even if that citation of Kitt is accurate, the situation is different today than in 1974.

What bothers me more than creationism being false is that it's a lie. You can't all be that ignorant. Most of you have to be lying.

[VadeRetro]

Note too that post 200, to which your own is addressed, would be a reasonable rebuttal to the point you attempt to make with a 31-year old quote on the current state of the evidence. It's hard evidence that Kitts was wrong.

Science isn't argued with dueling quotes. Religion apparently is. This would indicate that science isn't a religion after all, despite what creationists try to claim. People who try to dispute science with selective quoting simply do not understand what is going on.

In science, facts trump quotes. Quotes are mostly used for background before plunging into the latest round of findings.