[Putting aside quibbles about the accuracy of this statement, I take it you accept that the Cambrian period commenced approximately 542 million years ago and ended approximately 488 million years ago, and that you are therefore not a young earth creationist. Correct?]
No. I'm arguing that there was an explosion of fully formed species at one point. I've left out the fact for now that my belief is that it was not that long ago. I don't take a position on whether it was 6000 years or 10,000 as I'm not convinced one way or the other that God's 'days' were 24 hour days in the beginning- God did say one day is as a 1000 years. But there is nothing concrete indicating what the literal days were during creation.
[Again, putting aside your notion of "basically nothing" pre-Cambrian, I take it from this statement that you accept the existence of transitionals in the fossil record from at least the Cambrian period forward. Correct?]
Again no- there is no evidence of 'transitionals' in the fossil records- Fish with legs? Sorry- all it is is fish with legs. The genetics show that clams have always been clams, birds have always been birds etc etc etc. there are no genetics indicating half one species, half another. The earth should have mountains of transitional species fossils as Darwin himself noted- the fact is, there aren't, but there are completed species that shopw up all at once. Creation? Nah- can't be- has to be something else- right?
[As for your "built in protection levels" that prevent speciation, you seem to be contradicting yourself. It certainly appears that you accept the existence of "transitionals", yet you state:]
I do accept transitionals?
[Are you contending that speciation does not occur, but that the fossil record nevertheless contains transitionals?]
No what the records clearly show is adaption- NOT NEW information in species. This is a VERY important key point to understand if you're going to argue further this on this issue.
[And with respect to your "protections", what, precisely, are these "protections"? Invisible force fields of some sort? Or maybe armor plating? Or some kind of "DNA-acide"? Since this is the first I've ever heard about "built in protections," perhaps you could be a tad more specific, or at least direct me to some kind of literature on the subject.]
Nope- they are little dynamite packages that are set with trip wires- when an invading mutation tries to thwart the gen code, WHAM!- seriously though the protections are built in coding that prevent seriuous degredations from taking place that would alter species specific instructions- there are several layers, and the deeper we look into the tiniest structures and processes, the more intricate these protections become. A study of cellular construct will show you the immense complexities and protections I'm talking about.
there is no evidence of 'transitionals' in the fossil records... False. This is a transitional. Note its position in the chart which follows (hint--in the upper center).
Your claim ("no evidence of 'transitionals' in the fossil records") is meaningless as you seem to lack the training to have a valid opinion in this particular area.
Fossil: KNM-ER 3733
Site: Koobi Fora (Upper KBS tuff, area 104), Lake Turkana, Kenya (4, 1)
Discovered By: B. Ngeneo, 1975 (1)
Estimated Age of Fossil: 1.75 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, faunal, paleomagnetic & radiometric data (1, 4)
Species Name: Homo ergaster (1, 7, 8), Homo erectus (3, 4, 7), Homo erectus ergaster (25)
Gender: Female (species presumed to be sexually dimorphic) (1, 8)
Cranial Capacity: 850 cc (1, 3, 4)
Information: Tools found in same layer (8, 9). Found with KNM-ER 406 A. boisei (effectively eliminating single species hypothesis) (1)
Interpretation: Adult (based on cranial sutures, molar eruption and dental wear) (1)
See original source for notes:
Source: http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=33
Source: http://wwwrses.anu.edu.au/environment/eePages/eeDating/HumanEvol_info.html