Hi Bex,

It seems that you didn't credit the original authors of the comments/conclusions provided with the photos. Could you do that so I can look at their presentation directly?

In so far as transitional fossils are concerned try Tiktaalik

Snakes transitionals? Try Najash rionegrina

Dinos to birds? Try this or several here

Most of your claim seems to be along the lines of "If birds and dinos existed at the same time, then birds could not have evolved from dinos." Frankly, I don't think that any part of the theory of evolution nor any subsequent research conclusions concerning the mechanism of evolution, states anything of the sort. So, what makes you (and your source) think the existence of, birds and dinos, reptiles and mammals, fish and amphibians, at the same time refutes evolution in any way whatsoever? Besides, AIG states that evolution occurred after the Ark landed.
Quote
For example, horses, zebras and donkeys are probably descended from an equine (horse-like) kind, since they can interbreed, although the offspring are sterile. Dogs, wolves, coyotes and jackals are probably from a canine (dog-like) kind. All different types of domestic cattle (which are clean animals) are descended from the Aurochs, so there were probably at most seven (or fourteen) domestic cattle aboard. The Aurochs itself may have been descended from a cattle kind including bisons and water buffaloes. We know that tigers and lions can produce hybrids called tigons and ligers, so it is likely that they are descended from the same original kind.
Obviously, they believe in macroevolution on an accelerated scale that slowed way down sometime between 2000 years before Christ and now.

A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke