[BroJoeK]

Boogieman: "If we are still evolving, then what are the significant morphological changes between modern man and the first homo sapiens specimens that scientists date to around 100,000 years ago?"

There is an interesting list of relatively recent evolutionary adaptions in human beings, from my memory they include:

1. High altitude survival in the Himalayas, different from adaptions in the Andes.

2. Adult lactose tolerance among farmers.

3. Cycle cell resistance to malaria among people in such regions.

I don't think skin color is included since it may predate "modern" humans 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.
But body-types -- i.e., tall-thin vs. shorter & stockier -- that resulted from hunter-gatherers becoming more settled farmers, those may be too simple & obvious to be remarked on.

Boogieman: "At least a few of our features should be noticeably different."

Some of our features are indeed noticeably different enough that some of our forefathers believed they reduced certain people to the status of sub-human slaves.

I'm just saying...

[Boogieman]

“Some of our features are indeed noticeably different enough that some of our forefathers believed they reduced certain people to the status of sub-human slaves.

I’m just saying...”

Well, modern evolutionists reject all of that, so they can’t really use that for an answer to the question. What I’m looking for are large scale morphological changes, of the type we could notice only from the fossil record if we didn’t have access to DNA.

If the two assumptions (constant rate of genetic change over long scales of time, and constant appearance of morphological changes accompanying that change over long scales of time) are both true, then we should expect to see something of that in the last 100,000 years for which we have a relatively large fossil record for homo sapiens.

It seems to me we actually do not see that, and the obvious conclusion I come to is that one or the other assumption (or both) is false, and therefore, the other speculative conclusions that evolutionists come to based on whichever assumption is false are also invalid.