I am very much trying to understand you. Are you trying to misunderstand me? I asked for a demonstration of transition, you provide a link to a page which does not do that. I do not claim to win a point against transition by this, only that a point for it cannot be based on the information on that page, as the fossils represented there did not show change, only proposed it. There was no earlier form there, although it was discussed. Likewise the later form shown seemed hypothetical as it was an illustration and did not seem to be an identified actual species.
I am not adverse to proof of anything. My initial question which started our discussion still has not been addressed. Where is the record of the evolution of kidneys, gills, and wings.
I am still working my way through your latest offerings, and it is a wonderful thing how different segments in arthropods can have their genes activated or surpressed by UBX to determine its function as a thoracic or abdominal unit. But (I have not finished the site yet) even that site's transitional evidence seems to be a drawing morphing our first lobopod fossil with a fruitfly. I don't see the evidence of how we got from that soft skinned simple thing to an exoskeletal, sophisticated, compound eyed, flying creature. Stating "this scale here next to the leg eventually became a wing" just is not evidence of evolution, particularly Darwin's Natural Selection., it is merely conjecture, an hypothesis.
That page is about how several major phyla of the famous Cambrian Explosion arose. Every one of the many species cited on that page show features in some way intermediate between phyla and suggest the evolutionary origin of same.
What are you looking for, movie frames? Try here, Smooth Change in the Fossil Record.
If I have a case, its that the theory seems to be proof of itself, its true and the evidence shows it, because of the truth of the theory. Well it may well be true, but I wish someone would show me where I can find answers to the questions I asked when I first posted to the thread.
Theories in the physical sciences are never proven the way it happens in geometry. The best you can have is a preponderance of evidence. This is the case for evolution. It has a massive enough preponderance of evidence that the only questions concern precise mechanisms. See Evolution is a Fact and a Theory.