Pure and utter nonsense.
Modern man's earliest known close ancestor was significantly more apelike than previously believed, a New York University College of Dentistry professor has found.
A computer-generated reconstruction by Dr. Timothy Bromage, a paleoanthropologist and Adjunct Professor of Biomaterials and of Basic Science and Craniofacial Biology, shows a 1.9 million-year-old skull belonging to Homo rudolfensis, the earliest member of the human genus, with a surprisingly small brain and distinctly protruding jaw, features commonly associated with more apelike members of the hominid family living as much as three million years ago. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070324133018.htm
Moreover this lack of true intermediate species is the general and unbroken rule on this planet.
All extinct species are intermediate species
Basically, nobody with anything resembling brains or talent is defending evolution at this juncture; it is being defended by dead wood and second and third raters.
Thousands of PhDs are wrong and Wendy1946 is right. Your ignorance of the topic is profound.
I know what you're trying to say, but your statement is wrong. Most extinct species died out without leaving descendants. Several major extinction events killed off roughly 90% of all species living at the time, and the earth was repopulated by the minority which survived. Most of the extinct hominids you talk about all the time left no descendants; only Homo sapiens survived.
Every competent and honest scientist who has ever examined the situation is on record to the effect that there ARE NO intermediate species, e.g.
"I just cannot believe that everything developed by random mutations.........".
(Dr Dennis Gabor, winner of 1971 Noble peace prize in Science)."Nine-tenths of the talk on Evolution is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species".
(Dr Etheridge, world famous paleontologist of the British museum)."To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and so readily, by so many scientist without a murmur of protest".
(Sir Ernest Chain, co-holder of 1945 Nobel prize for developing penicillin)."May not a future generation well ask how any Scientist, in full possesion of his faculties and with adequate knowledge of information theory, could execute the feat of cognitive acrobatics necessary to sincerely believe that a (supremely complex) machine of information, storage and retrieval servicing millions of cells, diagnosing defects and then repairing them in a teleonomic Von Newman machine manner, arose in randomness - the antipole of information".
(Dr A. E. Wilder-Smith, deliverer of the Huxley Memorial lecture at the Oxford Union, Oxford University, 1986).The Fossils In General "Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of 'seeing' evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of 'gaps' in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them ..." David B. Kitts, PhD (Zoology) Head Curator, Dept of Geology, Stoval Museum Evolution, vol 28, Sep 1974, p 467 "The curious thing is that there is a consistency about the fossil gaps; the fossils are missing in all the important places." Francis Hitching The Neck of the Giraffe or Where Darwin Went Wrong Penguin Books, 1982, p.19 "The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution." Stephen Jay Gould, Prof of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University "Is a new general theory of evolution emerging?" Paleobiology, vol 6, January 1980, p. 127 "...Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils ... I will lay it on the line, there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument." Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London As quoted by: L. D. Sunderland Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems 4th edition, Master Books, 1988, p. 89 "We do not have any available fossil group which can categorically be claimed to be the ancestor of any other group. We do not have in the fossil record any specific point of divergence of one life form for another, and generally each of the major life groups has retained its fundamental structural and physiological characteristics throughout its life history and has been conservative in habitat." G. S. Carter, Professor & author Fellow of Corpus Christi College Cambridge, England Structure and Habit in Vertebrate Evolution University of Washington Press, 1967 "The history of most fossil species includes two features inconsistent with gradualism: 1. Stasis. Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same as when they disappear ... 2. Sudden Appearance. In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed'." Stephen Jay Gould, Prof of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University Natural History, 86(5):13, 1977 "But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?" (p. 206) "Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory (of evolution)." (p. 292) Charles Robert Darwin The Origin of Species, 1st edition reprint Avenel Books, 1979 The Abundance of Fossils "Darwin... was embarrassed by the fossil record... we are now about 120-years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, ... some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information." David M. Raup, Curator of Geology Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago "Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology" Field Museum of Natural History Vol. 50, No. 1, (Jan, 1979), p. 25 "Now, after over 120 years of the most extensive and painstaking geological exploration of every continent and ocean bottom, the picture is infinitely more vivid and complete than it was in 1859. Formations have been discovered containing hundreds of billions of fossils and our museums are filled with over 100-million fossils of 250,000 different species. The availability of this profusion of hard scientific data should permit objective investigators to determine if Darwin was on the right track. What is the picture which the fossils have given us? ... The gaps between major groups of organisms have been growing even wide and more undeniable. They can no longer be ignored or rationalized away with appeals to imperfection of the fossil record." Luther D. Sunderland (Creationist) Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 4th edition, Master Books, 1988, p. 9 "My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. ... The fossil material is now so complete that it has been possible to construct new classes, and the lack of transitional series cannot be explained as being due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, they will never be filled." Prof N. Heribert Nilsson Lund University, Sweden Famous botanist and evolutionist As quoted in: The Earth Before Man, p. 51 Evidence for Creation ? "A circular argument arises: Interpret the fossil record in terms of a particular theory of evolution, inspect the interpretation, and note that it confirms the theory. Well, it would, wouldn't it?" Dr.. Tom Kemp, Curator University Museum of Oxford University " A Fresh Look at the Fossil Record" New Scientist, Dec 5, 1985, p. 66 "Much evidence can be advanced in favour of the theory of evolution -- from biology, biogeography and paleontology, but I still think that to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation. ... Can you imagine how an orchid, a duckweed, and a palm have come from the same ancestry, and have we any evidence for this assumption? The evolutionist must be prepared with an answer, but I think that most would break down before an inquisition." E.J.H. Corner, Prof of Botany, Cambridge University, England Evolution in Contemporary Botanical Thought, Quadrangle Books, 1971, p. 97 "At the present stage of geological research, we have to admit that there is nothing in the geological records that runs contrary to the view of conservative creationists, that God created each species separately, presumably from the dust of the earth." Dr. Edmund J. Ambrose Emeritus Prof of Cell Biology, University of London The Nature and Origin of the Biological World John Wiley & Sons, 1982, p. 164