The creationists have the task of explaining the transitional forms that have been found (archaeopteryx, ambulocetus, ictheostega, the therapsids, to list a tiny fraction of what's been found so far).Correction: Should read "The creationists have the task of explaining away the transitional forms..." :-)
I disagree. Explaining away merely happens to be the only technique I've ever seen used. I will, however, allow for the possibility that someone will show how the Intelligent Design/Intelligent Origin Theory can account for the known transitional forms better than any evolutionary theory does.
Once again, the only reason you call them transitional forms is because you believe in evolution. If we removed evolution entirely from the equation, all you would have is an ugly bird in a rock formation. When we ask how it got there, evolutionists cling to forms like Archeopterix, when there are even older bird fossils than that that are fully bird. Besides, just because archeopterix has claws on it's wings does not make it something changing into a bird from reptile, the modern Hoatsin bird has claws on it's wings, EMUs do not fly, neither do ostriches, so there are many examples of flightless birds or birds that can fly for short periods of time, like the Turkey!! Where is the evolutionary form that preceded the turkey?