''Yet you fail to recognize that evolution from Creature A to Creature/Missing-Link B has to have thousands or millions of missing links between them to make such a transformation viable. Some of these would have to exist within the fossil record, but we can't find them. Yet, evolution theory doesn't work without them.''
I don't know how can someone keep saying the same shit after I gave him 20 different links to read about it. Some people are just stupid. There is no such thing as a missing link, they are called transitional fossils. A few examples of what you think doesn't exist here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil#Prominent_examples
There you go with the same old crap again. Those fossils aren't transitional fossils because not one of them has the immediate fossil that it transitioned from, or transitioned to, for that matter.
If it is a transitional fossil, where is even one fossil - I mean, literally one... not one group... one - that was the immediately previous form that one of your transitional fossils transitioned from, or one of the direct forms that your transitional fossil transitioned to. Show us one, and prove that it was the ONE that your transitional fossil transitioned from or to.
You can't do it. There aren't any. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Evolution is a hoax.
Well, come on you evolutionists out there. What is wrong with the info in that Wikipedia link, above? Check in the same page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil#Fossil_record . What's it saying in this second link? It's saying that the fossil record is so incomplete that it doesn't have a record of evolution in it. Yet, the animals shown in earlier portions of the page say that there are missing links. Since the fossil record is incomplete, how does anybody know that any of the fossils are missing links?
It's all make believe. There aren't any missing links because evolution doesn't exist.
Evolution is a hoax.