He goes on to finish that paragraph by stating, "The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record."
Which conclusion were you referring to? I have the entire text in front of me.
The point is that of the millions of fossils in the record now, there are no transitional forms that I've ever heard of. I have yet to find anyone that can point one out.
I really think the theory of evolution makes sense. It's a pretty straightforward way to explain things. But there doesn't seem to be a lot of concrete evidence for it.
The conclusion you just stated in the sentence before this!
The point is that of the millions of fossils in the record now, there are no transitional forms that I've ever heard of. I have yet to find anyone that can point one out.
Let's see:
Archaeopteryx. Confusciusornis. Homo erectus. Pakicetus. Ambulocetus. Basilocetus. Eohippus. Gogonasus. Tiktaalik. Captorhinus. Protoceratops. Diarthrognathus. Chiniquodon. Probainognathus. Morganucodon. Triadobatrachus.
Enough for you? I could go on!