its not that they miss it. They do everything they can to prove evolution true even if it means makeing up a story. Such as the frog/salamnder that was apppaerently a transitional form was missing the legs and joints(or some area near that) that would need to be there to even determine whether it was a transitional form or not.
Not all scientists are good at science. Here are 2 reasons relevant to your observation.
1) The confirmation bias. People tend to give more weigh to evidence that agrees with their conclusions.
2) Related to the confirmation bias. People tend to try to test their theories by try to find evidence of it occuring.
Ex: If I predict the Sun rises only if people sleep then I could propose a test where we have people sleep and see if the sun rises. Obviously this test is fraught with false positive evidence for my theory. To test my theory I would also need to test if the Sun will rise when nobody sleeps. Since the Sun will rise even if nobody sleeps, my theory is disproved.
Part of science is trying in good faith to accurately test (try to disprove) your theories.
I have found that people skeptical of Evolution tend to look at examples from the less reliable scientists.
PS: You can edit your previous posts.
