"NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS!"

"What am I being evasive about" - perhaps your refusal to accept the perfectly reasonable conclusion that no species of dinosaur existed at the earliest times because their fossilised remains have never been found in rock layers of the earliest/oldest times? And therefore, they must have come into existence at a later time than the simpler lifeforms we do find in some of the older rocks.

And I'm not seeing condescension from anyone, just frustration with your refusal or inability to admit these are reasonable conclusions.

If you are going to tell me the facts are these so I am wrong about something, then stop telling me that, if what you are telling me is not about facts, but instead what we observe and your reasonable conclusions.

If you don’t want to participate in a scientific discussion on the subject, then don’t participate. But then do everyone a favor, and stop responding to posts, if all you're going to do is spend weeks evading questions. 

What is it you are trying to convenience me of, spell it out, what you think is factual, or what we see and observe is factual, they are not the same things. 

"we see and observe" that dinosaur remains only begin to appear in higher (i.e. younger) rock strata and not in the oldest ones. We "see and observe" that lifeforms become increasingly simpler (in the lowest layers), as we look further back in time, until those with skeletons vanish altogether. That "is factual".

The entirely reasonable conclusion is that invertebrates, which includes the dinosaurs, appeared quite some time after the emergence of life. What do you question about that conclusion?

I'm done playing games. I've asked my question a 'thousand' times, and you pretend not to hear it. I don't care anymore. I am finished with this conversation.

Fyi- we don't actually see a "simple to complex" progression. Also, my point was not that "dinosaurs appeared quite some time after the emergence of life." Again, my point has nothing to do with evolution or the age of the earth. I've simply been referring to the physical location of organisms in the fossil record and the observational fact that they don't all appear in the same rock stratum, but different types of life are confined to different strata in a predictable way. This is an observational fact regardless of how young or old the earth is and regardless of whether evolution is true. In fact, this was observed long before Darwin's theory of evolution. 

Yes, I admit I was generalising but when dealing with someone who insists that all forms of life were created simultaneously, I hoped to show through a 'stripped down' version that the evidence in the rocks refutes such a belief.

Over-simplifying? Most certainly.

Gotcha. My point was even simpler than your simplified point . One could still argue (like YEC flood geologists do) that the first appearance of an organism in the fossil record does not = the time of origin of the organism (And as you know, YECs go a step further and argue the fossil record does not reflect origins at all, but the order of burial in a flood; and, thus, still hold to a 'simultaneous creation' view). And, of course, scientists recognize there must be a lag time (not as much as YECs argue, obviously). Due to the incompleteness of the fossil record, the first appearance of an organism does not coincide with origination, nor does the last appearance coincide with extinction. This is known as the Signor-Lipps Effect. 

But I wasn't even addressing origins or extinctions yet. Unbelievably, I was *still* just looking for an acknowledgement of the simple, observational fact that fossils occur in a predictable order/sequence (regardless of how young or old the earth is, and regardless of whether evolution is true; and even regardless of whether or not that order coincides with the time of origin of a given organism). (And I realize you understand all this, but amazingly, not everyone else does)

One wouldn't think it'd be so difficult to achieve agreement on such a simple, observational point. We haven't even broached the subject of how, then, to interpret or explain this observation, but might as well move forward since we're making no progress. On the face of it, I can think of three possible explanations for this predictable order that we observe in the fossil record.

I've been done with you and this conversation for a while now.

And yet you keep commenting 

And I keep reading, watching things rotate.

Croco-ducks!

One exception to that would be the disappearance of dinosaurs. Who vanish from the geologic ladder all at once, all across the world.

Signor-Lipps Effect applies there as well as some dinosaur clades appear to go extinct prior to the K-Pg extinction horizon