Larry Ingels recently wrote a letter to the editor in the Free Lance Star rejecting evolution based on an interesting claim.

He writes, "You cannot build such complex systems by starting with a single cell and using natural selection or mutations to increase their complexity".

Of course, as Mr. Ingels states himself, he is relying on Michael Behe, a biochemist popular among creationists for his views of the "irreducible complexity" of certain biological systems which he cannot possibly see as having been the product of evolution. Unfortunately, Behe's argument (and as a result, Ingels' as well) is flawed. Single cells are building up into complex systems all the time around us. If you don't understand what I mean, consider cell division. Or along that path, sexual reproduction.

This isn't the only silly quote though-
"Each time someone has claimed to have found such transitional evidence, it has ultimately been exposed as a fraud."

There's only been a few cases of fraud that come to my mind ("Archaeoraptor", Piltdown man, a few others), but there are countless other valid transitional fossils which I have never heard of being discounted! If someone can show me a reference discrediting Tiktaalik or the numerous other examples of the transition from fish to amniotes, I'd love to see it! Same goes for the transition of primitive synapsids to mammals, pseudosuchians to crocodilians, dinosaurs to birds, and so many others...

For the curious, there's a number of articles on Behe and "irreducible complexity" on this Web page-
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe.html
See also-
http://sfmatheson.blogspot.com/2008/08/why-im-not-behe-fan-part-i.html
http://sfmatheson.blogspot.com/2008/08/why-im-not-behe-fan-part-iia-malaria.html
http://sfmatheson.blogspot.com/2008/08/why-im-not-behe-fan-part-iib-abusing.html

As for the fossil record, this is a good starting point-
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates