"And this burning truth, this glaring fact remains: Evolutionists have absolutely no fossil evidence of the kind that Darwin himself said was required, 'interminable varieties, connecting together all the extinct and existing forms of life by the FINEST GRADUATED STEPS.'"
Darwin assumed such gradualism with a very sparse fossil record. We understand better the geology, the process of fossilization, and the manner in which speciation occurs (from observed instances of speciatin). If you actually read the Gould article you quoted, you would understand that. We shouldn't expect what Darwin did.
"After 150 years and multiplied millions and millions of fossils, the fact that you still have nothing, nothing, nothing, shows that Darwin was right, his theory did not and cannot pass the acid test, and it is a bust."
Actually, we have quite a bit to show that Darwin was mostly right. His absolutist stand on gradualism was wrong.
However, speciation occurs in fits and starts. We have observed speciation.
We also have tremendous evidence for macroevolution from diverse fields.
It seems to me that if we see speciation occurring and we have such a strong scientific concensus about the truth of evolution by means of natural selection, we ought to be able to cut Darwin a little slack about his mistake on the pacing of evolutionary change.
"Face it and do something valuable with your time here on earth.
That is enough for now, I will answer more later."
I think seeking the truth is a pretty valuable use of time. Understanding the development and diversity of life seems rather worthwhile, also. If you want to put it in religious terms, we are unlocking the secrets of God's creation, and using the wonderful brain God gave us.