[Alamo-Girl]

Er, I cannot resist - it is just too tempting ...

Have you made the mistake of reading creationist claims that there are "no" transitional fossils -- and believing them?

Wouldn't every one of the examples of "transitional fossils" you provide in your exhaustive post actually be subject to the fallacy of quantizing the continuum?

[PatrickHenry]

Wouldn't every one of the examples of "transitional fossils" you provide in your exhaustive post actually be subject to the fallacy of quantizing the continuum?

The increasingly evident fact that there are no clear-cut quanta (isolated species), but everything, past and present, forms a continuum, is what common descent is all about.

[Ichneumon]

Wouldn't every one of the examples of "transitional fossils" you provide in your exhaustive post actually be subject to the fallacy of quantizing the continuum?

No, because they're samples along the continuum of morphological change, and not being presented as discrete entities.

In fact, it's the anti-evolutionists who commit the fallacy of quantizing the continuum, by trying to assert that these transitionals are all "separate" creatures, and that there exist no further links between them.