The term “missing link” implies that a link not in evidence must indeed exist. Scientists have become so attached to orthodox evolutionary theory that they no longer question why there is not evidence of intermediary forms in a particular circumstance. As a result we are repeatedly treated to oversold attempts to fill these flaws in theory, sometimes on the basis of very equivocal or inadequate specimens.

The “living fossil” likewise shows up the slipshod attention to appropriate process. It is assumed that the animal cannot exist today, so it must be an anomaly. Again, no serious attempt to examine the assumptions that do not match the evidence. Just sweep it under the rug and keep going.

Modern science likes to pretend it has all the answers. Worse, they have adopted a view that neatly places the scientist at the apex of life on earth. Admitting otherwise reduces the status of the scientist and threatens to impeach his worldview. It also compels him to ignore the anecdotal and cultural evidence for wild men around the world. Our passion here suggests that evolution doesn’t quite work in the neat, clean way orthodox science wants it to.