Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2015-10-25 03:32 pm
[ SECRET POST #3217 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3217 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

__________________________________________________
11.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #460.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

no subject
Tornadoes however are verifiable. I have yet to see a genuine Missing Link.
no subject
As for missing links, we've got plenty of them (not to mention unicorns in the garden: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lenski_affair) I'm not a scholar of the subject, having gotten most of my knowledge from Scientific American, but there are a lot of popular science books that explain the state of the research. I've heard The Panda's Thumb is pretty good.
Honestly, that's the one thing I want to get out here--that this is a living, breathing science, not a stagnant set of dictates. Scientists can and do argue with existing evolutionary models, and Darwin's old ideas have been pretty heavily revised thanks to new fossils and new DNA tests. If you want to argue the principles, read a few books, take a few classes, and get involved in the science. But please don't treat it like an abstract philosophical problem that nobody can or does research.