There are many examples of intermediate species. Dogs are a bad example, as they are basically a man-made species derived from the wolf. However, among plants there are many examples of speciation in groups in which there are many examples of intermediate species. In fact, taxonomists now shy away from any hard and fast definition of species because there are so many intergradations. (For example, among orchids..specifically ladyslippers, there are groups of evolving species..Paphiopedilum malipoense group, the lowii group..that are basically in the process of evolving into different species.) Evolution is science, and as such it can and should be questioned. There are many facets of evolution, and aspects of it are continually being modified. However, evolution as a whole has been continually supported by scientific studies, never refuted. Intelligent Design can in no way be treated as a theory, as there is no way to prove its process. Evidence presented by ID'ers has been continually refuted (i.e. the bacterial flagellum), and besides, so much of evolution involves unintelligent design. There is a tremendous amount of inefficiency in organisms and their design...just look at sea turtles that risk their lives, and more importantly, the lives of their offspring, by returning to land to lay eggs. Even the example of DNA as something so perfect that it had to have been designed can no longer fly...evidence now points more strongly towards RNA as the molecule involved in the earliest stages of life. The very concept of "design" is a purely human one. Humans have the need to see design in everything, but the universe has existed for about 14 billion years without humans and our ideas. Now, I have no objection to the philosophy that there is intelligent design behind the process of evolution, as long as it is accepting of the idea that it is a philosophy and not scientific evidence.
