Does evidence of transitional forms exist ? (Hominid and other)

give me one evidence Lucy couldnot walk up right .Her knee joint /jaws /half man ape structures.

I am saying that if australopithecus had an anatomical structure suitable for bipedal walking .Give me one evidence that it was ancestor of man.

I am saying that if australopithecus had an anatomical structure suitable for bipedal walking .Give me one evidence that it was not ancestor of man.

Are you teaching me rules.Hey you are
escaping from the truth.I want an evidence proving australopithecus wasnot man ancestors.

australopithecus afarensis which was discovered in Hadar in Ethiopia 40 percent of the fossil the other 60 percent was missing .Anyway the fossil anatomical structures proved that it walked up right.You creationists say that it was an ape species not different from other apes but this discovery proved that your claims are wrong.

I am an athesist just like you.but I think I am going to be a muslim.muslims are not terrorists as I thought they have moral teachings and they are kind people what is your opinion. pop, we try to stay on topic around here and this post has NOTHING to do with the thread.Edited by AdminJar, : No reason given.

But I read that many transitional forms became myths as.coelacanth in fish evolution.
.archaeoraptor/archeopteryx in bird evolution.
.pakicetus/ambulocetus in whale evolution
.the land reptile euparkerio.
.the lower permian reptile arraescelis.

Well do you want me to start explaining why the basic transitional forms turned out to be not such thing.

There was an idea tha archaeopteryx can not fly properly because all the discovered fossils of this specimen the sternum was missing in these dicoveries but what was a surprise is the seventh fossil of the Archaeopteryx which was dicovered in 1992 had a sternum (rectangular)one so the old argument around archaeopteryx was totaly invalidated by this discovery.The journal Nature described the dicovery as follows
( the recently discovered seventh specimen of the archaeopteryx preserves a partial rectangular sternum long suspected but never previously documented.this attests to its strong flight muscles.)Nature vol.382 august 1/1996 p.401.This discovery invalidated that archaeopteryx couldnot fly perfectly.the structure of the archaeopteryx feathers (asymmetcric)is also an evidence that archaeopteryx was a normal warm blooded bird which could fly.The point of the warm blooded bird is contrary to the dinosaurs which are cold blooded.An old idea on the archaeopteryx teeth said that it was related to reptiles .Any way after checking the fossil record some birds during the archaeopteryx time and after it had teeth these are categorised with (birds with teeth) .
The point here is that the archaeopteryx and other birds teeh are totally different from therepod dinosaurs .THe three ornithologists L.D Martin /J.D Stewart/ K.N Whetstone observed that the archaeopteryx teeth and other similar birds have constricted bases and expanded roots while the theropod dinosaurs haveserrated teeth with strait roots .IN the archaeopteryx there are claws in its wings there are living species now have claws as TOURACO/HOATZIN.HEY IF YOU THOUGHT THAT I AM A CREATIONIST THEN YOU ARE WRONG BUT SOME TRANSITIONAL FORMS WERE TURNED TO BE NOT SUCH THINGS SO WE NEED TO RETHINK OF SOME OF TRANSITIONAL FORMS NOW.

oh yes I am rejecting that it has relation ship of therpods.But during the archaeopteryx time or before there were no reptiles having this teeth structure.Any way in the same time of the archaeopteryx there was living a bird called confuciusornis it has no teeth at all and modern birds anatomy.

confuciusornis is acreature with the following features.the same age as archaeopteryx.
.its beak and feathers share the same features as modern birds.
.the pygostle.SO THE IDEA OF THE IDEA THAT THE ARCHAEOPTERYX IS THEPRIMITIVE ANCESTOR OF BIRDS IS WRONG.