A. The statement \"Evolutionists cannot point to any transitional fossils\" is very frustrating to the scientific community. Answer the following questions. 1. What does a creationist mean by transitional form vs. what a scientist means by transitional form? 2. What is the frustration issue? B. You are an evolutionary biologist in a heated argument with a creation scientist who makes the statement—\"Mathematically, it is inconceivable that anything as complex as a protein, let alone a living cell or a human, could spring up by chance\". 1. Make a supporting statement for chance. 2. Now play the other side and respond to the supporting statement as you think a creation scientist would respond.? Solution The creationists do not believe in evolution, they believe that god created the earth and he only destroys it . they believe in the theory of intelligent design, therefore: answer A: 1: creationist mean that the transitional forms are a result of intelligent design by god and are not due to natural selection or evolution, whereas, scientists believe that transitional forms are a product of natural selection and they are like missing links that fill in the gaps between two phylums. As one phylum progresses to evolve in another phylum, some of the characters of advanced phylum remain in the animals giving rise to the transitional forms like the archeopteryx. 2. The frustration issue might be that there is a proof that such transitional forms existed and were very rare, they have been found in the fossilized form worldwide and yet the creationists continue to say that any such forms or organisms don\'t exist..