I find it odd that someone still asserts 'O.J. is guilty' based on their personal opinion which is contrary to the jury finding, yet these same folks appear to ridicule opinion when it challenges their favorite belief in every jot and tiddle of evolution theory. [Perhaps I should have left this thread for the dead thing it has become?]
The lesson is, in either case, if one ignores 'popular opinion' and follows the forensic evidence and the consensus of experts (who know the subject best), one inevitably finds OJ is guilty and humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Don't try to extend the analogy further than this (it doesn't work).
So, as far as the skull chart goes, are F-H humans or apes? Why is this not a good demonstration of evolution? If one looks at the chart for what it's meant to be, a graphic depiction of the progression of hominid forms through well-defined intervals of time, it is a very accurate picture of evolution. If one tries to tout it as the sole evidence for such evolution, it fails - that's not the point. There are thousands and thousands of other evidences for hominid evolution; this is only one 'snapshot' of the evidence, albeit a good one.