Ernest, I am quite well acquainted with the fossil record, thanks though, for others that might not be.
My question was about that, you missed the point. Your initial statement was that there was not enough information to be precise, yet you are making very precise statements, such as that Tiktaalik is a link to nothing. How can you possibly say that paleontolotist don't have enough information to be precise YET claim it's lineage went nowhere? It seems you are saying "we don't know enough to say what happened, and we know this because we know what happened". Also, your point abut Romer's gap doesn't really stand as it ran from about ~360 milion - 340 years ago and Acanthostega appeared about 365 million years ago, so you REALLY can't say whether or not it's line went anywhere, thank's to Romer's gap (which you brought up).
That is what I am asking you to clarify. It seems to me that anyone claiming that because we lack information and can't make a definitive statement by making a definitive statement about the VERY THING they are saying we don't know enough about is the one with no leg to stand on (unlike the fish).
Wouldn't it be better to simply say "That's an interesting idea, but as yet we don't have enough information to support that definitively"?