[Right Wing Professor]

Your faith is commendable.

You didn't look at the link, did you? Hey, what the hey, your time is better spent issuing ad hominems.

However, since you have now been given a clear refutation of your contention that there are no transitonal forms, the next time you deny it, it will be a deliberate lie, since telling untruths as a result of culpable negligence is still lying.

[RunningWolf]

Hey, what the hey, your time is better spent issuing ad hominems.

Fallacy, like your screen name, more apropos it should read 'Professing to be Right Wing' and very poorly too.

Wolf

[Amish with an attitude]

"You didn't look at the link, did you?"

I did visit the link, talk about ad hominems, the Evolutionists bible web site.

"However, since you have now been given a clear refutation of your contention that there are no transitonal forms,"

Do the math.

"the next time you deny it, it will be a deliberate lie, since telling untruths as a result of culpable negligence is still lying."

LOL, By arbitrary decree of of the Royal Danish court?

[Sopater]

You didn't look at the link, did you?

Well, I have looked at the link many times, and unfortunately I don't have the time to go into the details of the problems with each of these speculative transitional forms. Pick a couple of your favorites if you like and I'll tell you why the assumptions are not scientific and why they are based on speculation and presupposition.