It would be a reasonable assumption that if one found a sand castle on a beach, that it hadn't been there the day before. Sand castles don't last long on beaches.
Take all the time you want with that sand castle by 'natural selection' or perhaps you can tell me about how many log cabins have been formed by windstorms in forests? Again, take all the millions of years you need. ;-)
If sand castles and log cabins and their ancestors could reproduce with occasional mutations, then I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them eventually appear after billions of years.
But they don't.
To compare a single inanimate artifact with the entire ecological web of life is pointless. This is where your analogy is totally bogus.
And your explanation of a total lack of ANY missing links in the fossil record is??? I mean with all the zillions of species of animals you'd think there would be all kinds of missing links but there aint. Not one. What are the odds of that? LOL
VEry funny! Which brings up the question - what is the materialistic explanation for art?