Got me in what way? Scientists have disagreements. Welcome to the real world.
I mean I understand what you said.
You don't think there were any transitional species between ancient apes & modern humans, and you cite H. erectus as human. (Agreeing with Wise, who says in the Flores Man study, "Combined with ... other post-Babel humans (e.g. H. erectus, H. neanderthalensis), H. floresiensis suggests...")
If Homo erectus was simply what the humans at Babel looked like, there should be no doubt at all as to what kind of species they were: Homo sapiens. "Homo sapiens erectus", I guess. But if H. erectus was a transitional species between apes & humans, then you should expect to see disagreement between scholars as to what it was. And lo & behold, you do! The creationist scholars I cited all agree that it couldn't possibly be a transitional. Oh no, can't possibly be that. They just can't agree among themselves (some can't even agree with themselves) exactly what kind of transitional it isn't!)