And honestly, I need to ask you what you believe a transitional fossil would present. Some here seem to think that every small change or variation is proof of macroevolution. At least that’s what everybody keeps pointing me to in references. I’m not reading about transitions. I guess to put it in layman’s terms, or for the progressive creationists, where is there evidence of one “kind” evolving into another, or say fossil proof of a creature both reptile/amphibian/mammal, however you want to mix and match. That would be proof of macroevolution, which is what Darwin was hypothesizing without a doubt. Macroevolution. He would of course assume microevolution as part of that process, but he needed, and evolutionists need both. I find this prevalent among evolutionists. They get a little hazy on definitions, then belittle those unable to pinpoint them on it. What is your example or proof, if you will, of macroevolution? And feel free to go zoom back and forth through the time zone, because terms tend to take on new or somewhat different meanings.