We have much more than that. You seem committed to rejecting that science.itís going to take more than artist conceptions and a sparse few broken bones to convince me that man evolved from apes.
How about the intact bones? They're not human, nor any kind of ape in existence.
How about human chromosome 2?
Are those your standards for rejecting a field of science? How about if you applied it to theology. There have been uncounted numbers of religious frauds unearthed. Are you willing to apply the same standards for rejection there? If not, how do you justify having separate standards for the two?We have seen some fraudulent and grossly exaggerated data coming from evolutionist in my lifetime. Haeckel's drawings for example was in my biology books as a kid. It was all a Fraud. Then I remember seeing in 1999 Nat Geo, this new fossil called ďArchaeoraptor liaoningensis,Ē the missing link between birds and dinosaurs. It turns out it was all fabricated but sold to millions as legit. Nat Geo did a great job on itís color photoís. Hell it looked real impressive. Atheist everywhere were like proud fathers pushing out their chest in pride. And quite frankly speaking the evolution of man is just chocked full of fraudulent, misinterpreted, bogus, fake, artist conceptions, and wild imagination.