I think one of the, many, things that Honkytntkmn has misunderstood about evolution is rarity of fossilisation of large animals in certain environments.
Take the most famous fossilised animal in the world - T. rex - every natural history museum you go into has one glowering down at you. They were top predators so they were never massivly numerous, probably a bit like human ancestors. There must be thousands of them right?
Wrong.
There are about 30 T. rex skeletons in existence at the moment despite looking for them for over a 100 years with massive monetary gain for the finders and the fact that they are found in the US.
But they are all complete skeletons aren't they?
No, none of them are complete.
But they all have those big scary skulls don't they?
No. Only 3 skulls have been found.
In comparison we have many more fossils of human intermediary species but only becase we have searched for them so assiduously. We have dug up half of North East Africa looking for specimens. These human ancestors lived in an environment much less prone to fossilise animals than the Cretaceous of North America, that was a land of shallow seas, muddy lagoons and wide braided river valleys, all reasonable environments for fossilising large animals.
Human ancestors lived on the Savannah. If you put a human body out on the african savannah today I doubt you will find so much as a kneecap left by the next day, fossilisation in such an environment is extremely rare.
Honkytnkmn doesn't "believe" in evolution because he doesn't want to, it has nothing to do with a lack of evidence or a lack of fossils, it has everything to do with a strongly held pre-existing religious conviction that can't fit with modern science in this case.
If we found a thousand beautiful fossils that demonstrated the complete pathway of evolution from a chimp common ancestor to Homo sapiens sapiens in the next year he'd just move on to something else that would stop him "believing" in evolution.
