Not at all what the poster said. Neanderthal IS closer in DNA to humans than to a chimp, that doesn’t tell you if it was in a direct line of descent that led to humans.
Creationist “science”; invent a ludicrous requirement, point out that reality doesn’t support the ludicrous requirement - conclude that the science is faulty because it doesn’t live up to your invented criteria.
All that evolutionary or ANY science needs is a model that explains the data. Common descent of species explains the data as to why humans and chimps are closer to each other than either is to a gorilla. It also explains why we and other apes form a pattern of similarity and divergence in our ERV sequences.
Creationism as a model doesn’t explain the data. Most creationists don’t know understand or even CARE to know the data.
The latest fossil find is obviously of a species of bipedal ape.
Humans are, zoologically, a bipedal ape; the only one extant upon the Earth today.
At differnt times and places apparently there were several different species of bipedal apes.
Once again evolutionary science has a model that explains every observation. Once again creationism has nothing, does nothing, explains nothing, and doesn’t lead anyone to any further knowledge.
Just the way creationists like it!
After all, the more someone learns the less likely they are to be a creationist!
For example, A. sediba's arms are too long—too apelike—and the species isn't as well adapted for upright walking as some scientists expect the direct ancestor to the first humans to be, Wood said.
Also, at 1.95 to 1.78 million years old, the A. sediba fossils simply aren't old enough to represent an ancestor to Homo, said anthropologist Brian Richmond, also of George Washington University. (Explore a prehistoric time line.)
"It's hard to argue this is the ancestor of Homo when it's occurring much later than the earliest members of the genus Homo by half a million years," Richmond said, referring to an early fossil of H. habilis that dates back to 2.3 million years ago.