Seems I recall that Darwin was concerned what the fossil record would actually show when it was all said and done. A lot of questions could be laid to rest if we were able to pull DNA information beyond the 60-100,000 year old barrier.
This is one of the problems about arguing about bones, the evolutionists always keep claiming that 'the next one will really show evolution to be true'. However, it seems to me that with 150 years of searching and 100 times more bones now than in Darwin's time, evolutionists should at least have the honesty to say that the bones give very dubious evidence of evolution.
A lot of questions could be laid to rest if we were able to pull DNA information beyond the 60-100,000 year old barrier.
There certainly wood be, however it will have to be due to great luck that we would find much of it. Bodies decay quite fast. However, with easier, faster and cheaper ways to read the genomes of both humans and other species, we may be able sooner than many think answer some very important questions about evolution. Most DNA comparisons up to now have been done based only on partial looks at different genomes and without knowing what much of the DNA we were looking at did. We should be able to start making some intelligent comparisons in the next few years.