"So long. And thanks for all the fish"
I would strongly dispute that notion. Pure, unadorned evolution has one, singular measure of success: the ability to survive long enough to propagate. There is only one species with the capability to ensure that it survives the total annihilation of the planet itself. Guess which one that is?
Viruses?
The capacity to survive the total annihilation of the planet is only an evolutionary advantage if the planet is actually totally anihilated. Barring this, those species that are most successful at reproducing, given their actual environment are the ones that are the "pinnacle of evolution." By that measure, the sauropods were very successful until their environment changed radically. It is easy to imagine an environment in which humans would not be particularly successful. For example, if tommorrow a full blown nuclear war were to start, with nuclear detonations occurring over the majority of land masses of the earth, it would be the cockroaches, not humans, that prove to be the most successful species, since humans aren't particularly well suited to environments with high levels of radioactivity. (not to mention that it would be humans themselves who caused the environmental change that leads to their demise, not the hallmark of an extremely successful species.) Furthermore, in terms of evolutionary success, it isn't humans that are the most successful organisms. I can think of at least two groups of organisms (insects and bacteria) that are much more successful than huamns in terms of their ability to propogate the species.
I don't know of any species capable of surviving the total destruction of the planet. But if you are referring to humans, you need to know that a significant percentage of your body weight is comprised of microorganisms.
"So long. And thanks for all the fish"
