The fact is evidence strongly implies that the robustness of a species is caused by localized population bottlenecks and that change in species is mostly the result of global population bottlenecks. He got it wrong because he didn't understand that the nature of life is consciousness and near extinctions are caused principally by individual differences in behavior that is an expression of genetics. There's simply no such thing as "rabbits" so he couldn't see the individuals which we call "rabbits".
Any pyramid builder could explain to Darwin exactly how change in species occurs even though he had less experimental evidence to show it. If you don't understand most change in species results from behavior then you are missing the forest for the trees.
Curiously even the link about peacocks mentioned near extinctions in their past. I think biologists are coming to much better understand this subject but for some reason they still support Darwin's nonsense.