what you first all fail to understand... is that the proposed process of evolution involves gradual changes over many generations. We can agree to that correct?

So none of the so called 'Transitional Fossils' are remotely transitional.

A transitional form would be one going through the process of developing an arm / leg etc. These fossils should be plentiful considering it would take a sheerly ridiculous number of steps before the animals new form was fully developed... In otherwords.. how many generations and how many forms would it take for a arm to form in an animal which has no arms. How many millions of tries would be necessary by random mutation before it was successful.

I'm sure you can imagine the process.. considering the animal has no idea what it is trying for - the first form of an arm would be, I suppose a stump of some type... now considering this stump would serve it no actual purpose (and in the case of fish we have the peculiar situation where it randomly would need to form 4 of these in symetrical spots... all at once? or one at a time?) This stump would be a detriment.. not an improvement - and so would the tremendous number of other steps involved until this form was complete.

The key here being that every aspect of every animal and plant would need to go through this process.. and the vast majority of these changes could not occur in a beneficial manner - natural selection supposedly works because this change is an improvement.

We have no fossils which represent these transitions.. nothing that isn't fully functional. The ground should be littered with millions of these tiny changes.. in the development of eyes / limbs / and every other form. Instead we find animals which are finished products - just like IDA - well designed for their given purpose.. no works in progress.. no half-formed wings. Were these to even be demonstrated the question would still remain... if every species went through these changes for every single aspect of their development.. any fossil bed should be full of intermediates. By intermediates I mean something which is in the process of developing something.. not finished. IDA uses a thumb which we do not have to climb trees.. it is formed and completed.

One other thing to consider is that evolution's proposed mechanism is random mutation combined with natural selection.. it randomly makes changes.. the failures die out. At the heart of it the mechanism is simply random mutation. - so how many tries does a creature have to make before it randomly stumbles upon something which works? I would wager a vast number..

Thus the fossil record has a compound problem.. not only should it show transitional fossils that are in the lineage of the current form.. it should also show the millions and millions of failed attempts.. the millions of random tries toward a new limb of some kind that were rejected by natural selection.

Not only that - but the world around us should show living examples of these failed species.. because natural selection works on the flawed assumption that if something decides to start working on a new limb.. that since the new limb is a decidedly bad evolutionary change, that creature would die out. Not the case... every animal wants to survive.. and just because it has an inferior design in no way suggests they wouldn't still be around.

IDA is a lemur... a very old variety of lemur. - and no, you don't have a thumb on your foot.