This is simply untrue. There's an extensivive pre-cambrian fossil record. Saying there isn't doesn't make it true.
This is despite the rather obvious fact that as you go further back in time, fewer creatures have any hard parts to fossilize. Difficulty finding evidence that has been erased does not change history.
We have gotten to the point that trading punches on multiple issues is counterproductive. I'm game, but I get the feeling (and probably you do too) that either one of us could go on forever without seriously damaging the other's views, if we continue to discuss multiple facets of the argument at once. I admit you responded very well to my 2 part challenge in post 112, and concede you have a pile of evidence. However, for us to continue in the same manner would be to fail to do that evidence justice. So that I can give my best argument, would you permit me to narrow the focus of the discussion (for the time being) to a very narrow discussion: Irreducible complexity? I hope you accept the spirit of this concession--I'm game, but I don't think I'm going to learn as much by trading jousts without getting in-depth.