Turn a frog into a mammal. Than you can slap creationists in the face.
Until then, ho hum.
Why the hell are you expecting
convergent evolution from an animal (well, animal archetype) that has evolved to fit within a specific environmental niche? What possible survival advantage is there to drive mutations converging into a space inhabited by better adapted, dominant species?
That's just daft - you're actually proposing the opposite of the effect of evolution; that rather than diverging, species will somehow all combine into some homogenous group of identical characteristics.
Although, they've already got
examples of speciation, of course.
EDIt; not to mention the shared genes, molecules and common apical ectodermal ridge features that are shared between amphibians and humans (in particular), pointing to a shared ancestry. Oh, and the transitional fossils between fish and amphibians like Kenichthys, Acanthostega, or Ichthyostega.
Oh, and evolution is, to reinforce the blinding obvious, a diverging and branching 'action'; evolution does not travel 'up' biological classification trees, but down; an evolved new species retains the biological classification of it's ancestor species, and exists on the level below.