Scientists expected to find gradual transitions in the fossil record (hence the quotes).
So evolutionists can't even use the sub humans became extinct explanation when there is no solid scientific evidence they existed. It is well known the fossil record doesn't support their story and that is why they conjured up the ad hoc explanation punctuated equilibrium to cover up their failed expectation.
So do you have any evidence that punctuated equilibrium is incorrect?
It is the nature of science to work toward increased accuracy. So the increase in accuracy that the idea of punctuated equilibrium provides is now used by creationists to denigrate science? Bit of a double standard, eh?
By the way, one of my Ph.D. subjects (a while back) was fossil man so don't plan on pulling any hats out of your rabbit.
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.