"Transitional form" is an arbitrary term because every organism, whether living or fossil, is a link in the chain between an ancestral organism and a descendent. The break into new species is gradual rather than sudden. Every fossil is therefore a "transitional form" in the strict sense.
In general, "transitional form" is used specifically to link one modern species with its prehistoric ancestor. In some cases, a form may not be a specific ancestor of an identifiable living species, but it may have general characteristics that indicate the evolutionary path that was being followed. E.g. the bird fossil Confuciusornis may not be ancestral to living birds, but it still indicates the direction of evolution from earlier repties.
There are abundant transitional forms that illustrate e.g. the transition from fish to land animals; the transition from amphibians to reptiles; the transition from dinosaurs to birds; and the transition from early apes to humans.
Because the definition of "transitional form" in the narrow sense (a transition between two set organisms) is variable, it's not possible to give a strict number.
If evolution is slow and steady, we'd expect to see the entire transition, from ancestor to descendent, displayed as transitional forms over a long period of time in the fossil record.
supports hypothesis that species have changed over time.
yes
transitional epithelium
That would be transitional epithelium. Transitional Epithelium is specialized to change in response to increased tension. It forms the inner lining of the urinary bladder and lines the ureters, and part of the urethra. It protects and has distensibility.
Fossils or organisms that show the intermediate states between an ancestral form and that of its descendants are referred to as transitional forms. There are numerous examples of transitional forms in the fossil record, providing an abundance of evidence for change over time.
If evolution is slow and steady, we'd expect to see the entire transition, from ancestor to descendent, displayed as transitional forms over a long period of time in the fossil record.
Answer 1For Example, You find a fossil of a creature from a certain timeline, then you find the same creature with some changes in a timeline later than the previous and if you have enough fossils you can see how the organism appears at its earliest place in the fossil record( some organisms only appear in the fossil record once they have evolved in a way that makes fossilization possible eg shell, jellyfish are very rare in fossils because they are mostly water) and see the organism change over time into a completely different animal through a series of consecutive glimpses of the creature.Answer 2The absence of transitional forms (fossil record) is an insurmountable hurdle for all evolutionists.Answer 3The fossil record, with its many diverging progressions of traits and morphological intermediates, illustrates the changing of life forms as they diverge from their common ancestors towards more modern forms, matching seamlessly the nested hierarchies of modern morphology. Even without the fossil record, we would have had a pretty good picture of our evolutionary past - with it, we can give shape to the forms that came before us.
There is no specific scientific name for the concept of the "missing link" in human evolution. It is a colloquial term that has been used in the past to describe hypothetical transitional forms in the evolutionary lineage of humans. Scientists now understand that evolution is a complex and continuous process with many transitional forms, rather than a single missing link.
Darwin predicted that the fossil record would either prove or falsify his theory. Darwin realized the difficulty the fossil record (missing links) gave his theory when he said, "Why, if species have descended from other species by fine graduation, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?" Today, top evolutionists know that Darwin's predictions of what the fossil record would reveal have failed.
The transition of phyla of organisms over time. That is the great strength of the fossil record; evolution shown in the sedimentary rock.
False, there are many transitional forms in the fossil record. Osteolepis Eusthenopteron Panderichthys Tiktaalik Elginerpeton Obruchevichthys Ventastega Acanthostega Ichthyostega Hynerpeton Tulerpeton Pederpes Eryops Pedopenna Anchiornis Archaeopteryx Confuciusornis Ardipithecus ramidus Australopithecus afarensis Australopithecus africanus Australopithecus anamensis Australopithecus garhi Australopithecus aethiopicus Australopithecus boisei Australopithecus robustus Homo habilis Homo rudolfensis To name a few.
supports hypothesis that species have changed over time.
yes
yes
The fossil record shows that different species have evolved over time. The fossil record also provides evidence of how a specific organism evolved from earlier species. The fossil record shows that organisms have become more complex over time. It also shows which organisms lived during the same time period, which have a common ancestor, and which have become extinct.
A lack of transitional forms would have suggested some flaw in the fundamentals of evolutionary theory. At least, we would have expected some transitional forms to be found, if either gradualism or punctuated equilibrium was the correct model for evolution. As it is, more than enough transitional forms have been found to date to satisfy any objective observer.