It was important because Darwin's theory of evolution predicted the existence of "transitional" fossils; evidence that animal groups (in archaeopteryx's case) such as birds and reptiles had common ancestors. Archaeopteryx had feathers, like modern birds, but also teeth and a bony tail - which no modern bird has.
It was also important because of the timing of its discovery; Darwin's On the Origin of Species was published in 1859, in 1861 the first complete specimen of archaeopteryx was discovered (a feather had been discovered earlier). It provided such timely and compelling supportive evidence that some people claimed it was a fake. Since then, 9 further specimens have been found - essentially ruling out that possibility.
Archaeopteryx was an important fossil find because it was one of the first dinosaurs discovered that showed that birds evolved from dinosaurs. It had dinosaurian traits, such as teeth, claws on the wings, and a long tail, but also bird like features, such as a beak, wings, and feathers.
Well first it is a dinosuar bird that has not been discoverd it is bilived to be a cross between a reptile and a bird experts bleive it was the first bird and is a link between a dino and todays modern birds
They believe it to be the closest common ancestor between dinosaurs and birds
This is a transitional form with the features of theropod dinosaurs and emerging bird features and having the ability to fly.
The discovery of Archaeopteryx was important because it provided crucial evidence for the theory of evolution. This fossilized creature had features of both birds and dinosaurs, supporting the idea of a shared evolutionary history between the two groups. Additionally, it showed that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs, helping to bridge the gap between reptiles and birds in the tree of life.
Yes. If evolution was not widely supported by evidence, then it would be regarded as a hypothesis rather than a theory.
That the theory of evolution by natural selection fits the facts of evolution. The theory of evolution by natural selection is based on myriad lives of converging evidence and is the best explanation we have for the adaptive changes leading to speciation in populations of organisms.
Yes. If evolution was not widely supported by evidence, then it would be regarded as a hypothesis rather than a theory.
"Evidence". There's no special term to distinguish evidence supporting one theory in science from evidence supporting any other theory in science.
Morphological evidence.Genetic and genomic evidence.Geographical evidence.
Darwin .
The evidence fits evolution but it is a theory for now.
None exists.
NO. take Darwin's theory of evolution for example. there is no real evidence, but it is accepted as fact by most in America today.
It is a comprehensive explanatory body of well supported by the evidence concepts that go for in explaining the fact of evolution.
The only theory. The theory that explains the facts of human evolution and is internally consistent, plus supported by massive amounts of evidence.