Bones do not prove evolution or intelligent design. Bones do not provide sufficient data for making any kind of decision as to the origin of life. Bones leave out 99% of what is important about a species. For example we would never have been able to know that the platypus laid eggs if we did not have living example of it. In fact before it was discovered it was thought that all mammals were live bearing. There are many other features that bones cannot tell us. One of the most important is the mode of reproduction. To a great extent, the mode of reproduction is the most important feature as to how we classify species and this cannot be gathered from bones. In addition, the mode of reproduction affects directly the contentions of evolution about descent. How can one say that bones prove descent when the most basic part of descent is the mode of reproduction of a species and bones tell us nothing about it?????
As to monkeys, and humans and DNA the claim is false and it is typical of the kind of claims supporting evolution. That claim was made over a dozen years ago and neither the genomes of humans nor the genomes of any apes had been sequenced (indeed, the genomes of apes have not yet been sequenced) so the claim is false, it did not take into consideration the whole genome, only a small sample of it and we cannot tell if the part chosen was representative or not. In fact, the 'scientist' that made the 98% claim has since said it was wrong. Now he says we are only some 95% like chimps. However, an organism is not reducible to a count of the DNA bases. It is the functionality and abilities and interconnectedness of all of them that makes an organism work and that cannot be ascertained by mere counting of DNA bases. Can monkeys sing Opera? Can they write Hamlet? Can they paint the Sistine Chapel? Can they make cars, planes and ships? Don't think so. They are far removed from man in everything that gives life meaning - the claims of the charlatan Darwin notwithstanding.
Absolutely right.