In Darwin's time the fossil record was scarce, but with the millions of examples we now have, it is clear that there are no "interminable varieties" by which connections are made to transitional forms between species.
Really? The paleontological community seems to think otherwise. Where are you getting your information? Please be specific.
The few that do seem to exist, are but the straws the drowning-in-truth materialists clutch at to keep Darwin's faulty premise from going the way of, well, the dinosaurs.
That's some really nice poetry, but doens't have any bearing on reality.
Microevolution is a physical fact, Macroevolution is faith-based. Evolutionism and Creation are both belief systems, but believers in Creation are honest about their foundation, while Evolutionists want their followers blinded by "science."
Well, let's see if you can explain the difference between micro- and macro-evolution to us, and perhaps what the barrier between them might be. Please be specific.
Evolution is not a belief system, it is science. What conjecture are you using to conclude that evolution is a faith?
Also, why is science "blinding"? Or are you just quoting the Thomas Dolby song for dramatic effect?
Darwin gives you permission to reject his views based on the geological record, which we now know is sadly lacking in evidence. Please consider doing so.
Darwin didn't know about the DNA evidence that has been found that corroborates his theory. Darwin didn't know about radiometric dating. Darwin wasn't THERE for the 150 years of further research that does nothing but CONFIRM the theory.
Anyone who rejects the theory cetainly can't intellectually do it based on scientific evidence, they would have to do it for other reasons. I can only imagine what that reason might be. Please be specific.