Um, no.
I have no idea what "missing link" you are referring to, and I get the impression you don't really want to learn anything about the vast number of fossils we already have that show transitions between types of life. There's a lot of info in those links, but you have to read it and try to understand it for it to make sense.
"Common descent is a general descriptive theory that concerns the genetic origins of living organisms (though not the ultimate origin of life). The theory specifically postulates that all of the earth's known biota are genealogically related, much in the same way that siblings or cousins are related to one another. Thus, macroevolutionary history and processes necessarily entail the transformation of one species into another and, consequently, the origin of higher taxa. Because it is so well supported scientifically, common descent is often called the "fact of evolution" by biologists."
These are just words. They don't prove anything at all. It is just speculation brought about by genetic similarities found among difference species on Planet Earth (where all life is based on the same conditions - thus you would expect to find genetic similarities)
"The theory specifically postulates that all of the earth's known biota are genealogically related, much in the same way that siblings or cousins are related to one another."
Again, another statement which has zero evidence. To claim that a phytoplankton shares the same genetic structure with a human as a twin shares with it's twin is ludicrous on its face. And, as far as fossil evidence, where has anyone demonstrtated definitively that one creature evolved from another. Again, just a theory with no link from one fossil to another (other than what the scientist who makes the claim is claiming) Just because two things show structural similarities doesn't prove one evolved into the other. It is just a theory.