[Coyoteman]

and yet still cling to the notion that they will one day find the myriad of transitional species that they all admit are conspicuously absent from the fossil record

Sorry, that happens not to be the case.

See this: 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent.

Note, even prominent IDers accept an old earth and common descent. That argument is over.

[GodGunsGuts]

Apparently, Stephen Jay Gould didn’t get the memo:

The history of most fossil species include two features particularly inconsistent with gradualism:

1) Stasis - most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless;

2) Sudden appearance - in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and ‘fully formed’.

Gould, S.J. (1977)
“Evolution’s Erratic Pace”
Natural History, vol. 86, May

[Gargantua]

Yeah, provide some links to some vapid Evo-sapien sites which claim that "even most creationists no longer believe their own eyes," and pretend you've addressed the issue.

I know that nothing will change your mind until you're marching off to eternity in Hell. Fine by me. But when you are, do you really think you'll still feel that this inane rebellion against God's Truth was worth the price you'll pay?

We'll see, huh?

;-/

[GodGunsGuts]

==See this: 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent.

See this: A Critique of Douglas Theobald’s “29 Evidences for Macroevolution”

http://www.trueorigin.org/theobald1a.asp#contents