Well, he's busier than I'd ever have known. Thanks. His presentation was interesting to me, though, as I said earlier "I am not a scientist" which inadvertently dismisses everything I heard that fine day (or was it night?)
Digging further, there is some interesting evidence regarding his work on the dentition of Neanderthal man. It appears that he claimed to have discovered some new bones of a Neanderthal skeleton that had been studied. Apparently, he based part of his book on these new "bones." Sadly, when he submitted them to a museum, they were found to be pieces of rock, not bones, and not fossils. He's still arguing that he was right, but the analysys from the museum appears to be pretty conclusive.
A search on his name will bring up all this information.
If he lied about the bones, what else did he lie about? It's not nice to lie, even if it's in the name of a deity. Not nice at all.
I will leave the decision on who's telling the truth to the examination of anyone interested enough to do the search. Here's the site where the investigator demonstrates that the bones are not bones and not fossils:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/stringercuozzo.html
Here's Cuozzo's site, where he tries to weasel out of the controversy:
http://www.jackcuozzo.com/
Scroll down.
Please note, while reading Cuozzo's pages, in which he attempts to refute the evidence that the "bones" are not bones at all that he does not even know that the symbol "Si" stands for Silicon, not Silicone. He labels his data thus: Si = Silicone.
He reveals himself to be a non-scientist and not competent to discuss the issue, since he does not know the difference between an element and a filling for breast implants. He does it more than once, so it's not a typo.
This is one of your "Scientists." Feh!