What I'm saying is that I find it rather unremarkable to point to a creature that is only mild different from another and declare proof for transitional creatures.
The fact that some worms or fish end up slightly different from their forbears only demonstrates that there is incredible depth in the genetic coding. That's all it really proves. However it does not "prove" that something new has arisen.
Simply because two ring creatures can't reproduce with the guys on the other end, but can with a majority of the others doesn't prove they are a different species. It could simply indicate that some survival mechanism is in play. Are they still ring creatures? Why yes they are.
With respect to Mr. Henry's links, I am digesting them more slowly in deference to his concern that I blew through the other info w/o really digesting it. I can say that so far they are unconvincing, presenting much speculation.
Everything can be unconvincing to the person who wants to resist the implications strongly enough.
And chew on these while you're at it: 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution The Scientific Case for Common Descent.