It is difficult, for some, to understand that there is no such thing as a "transitional" animal.
No branch is "transitional".
If we ever find a "transitional" fossil, in the sense the Creationists understand the word, Darwin's theory would have been proven wrong.
"Random chance", "transitional", "macro-evolution": three words that have nothing to do with Darwin's theory.
Unfortunately it takes some reading to understand Darwin's theory and most Creationists openly admit that they won't do that.
Leauki,
Have you ever heard of or read Jeremias Wells, "History of Western Civilization"?
He writes that after Adam and Eve committed Original Sin, mankind's intellect was darkened, his will weakened, and his tendencies were subjected to evil inclinations. His unruly nature divided society into 2 camps based on 2 opposing principles...."A camp of those who live solely for the pleasures of this world and one for those who order themselves and society for the glory of God. Therein lies the drama."
As far back as Copernicus, a "war" began pitting science against religious truths. Many in scientific circles regarded Genesis and Christianity as an obstacle to scientific progress. They declared the religious truths of Adam and Eve, Original Sin and Christ's Redemption as legend, myth, or misconception, etc.
With an outlook on disproving that the universe and man were created by God, science developed new theories and views and hypotheses. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is essentially a set of ideas promoted by atheistic or agnostic scientists, naturalists, and materialists.
To most people, Darwin's Theory of (Natural) Evolution essentially means that over billions of years, all present forms of life---plant, animal and human---"evolved" or emerged from a common cell by chance processes without a transcendent Creator anywhere in the picture.
Granted, there are many conflicting versions of Darwin's Theory. Once older theories run into conceptual problems, newer versions emerge, their proponents always hoping to find the elusive mechanism for how this macro-evolutionary process occurred/is occurring.
Evolutionists still have to show a clear pattern of descent with modification both conceptually and from evidence in the fossils. If Eovlution did occur, it should be possible to show lineages and to establish phylogeny (a closely identified "tree" structure ancestry),
but this has not been done. There are no fossils that show these "transitional" lineages, none whatsoever.
Anyone who believes they descended from an ape-like creature believes on Darwinian faith becasue that camp has shown no proof of its claim.
The following quote is from ReMine, The Biotic Message.
"Life was designed to resist all naturalistic interpretations. Therefore, the biomessage sender had to defeat the appearance of lineage. This was done with diversity (which) is the antithesis of lineage. Diversity destroys the semblance of lineage...Diversity thwarts phylogeny.
The pattern of life at the molecular level of proteins and genes follows message theory precisely. It could hardly be more potent evidence. Life's many molecular phenograms and cladograms fomr a smooth, distince pattern that refutes transposition and unmaking processes. That pattern allows the absence of gradual intergraduation and phylogeny to take on real force as evidence against evolution. That pattern also unifies life and reveals an incredible degree of planning and design."
The actual fossil evidence supports Genesis. In contrast to evolutionary depictions of a "tree or bush like" ancestry, the fossil evidence of both creatures and plants found is one of parallel vertical ancestry. Most of the phyla appear all of a sudden, in the Campbrian Period, the field evidence is that of well preserved unique types of fossils and absolute absence of "transitional", or "intermediate" or "links" life forms.
