His PhD has nothing to do with the subject, he’s a fraud."
Right.
from Bergman's article: "Human Evolution Story in Tatters.
Another skull scrambles the paleoanthropology story.
What is the reason for so many rewrites of human evolution?"
V-TWIN: "There are so many holes and gaps it the scientific argument for how life on earth began its not even funny."
Let's start here: "holes and gaps" are what drive science, you know that don't you?
It's what distinguishes science from any religion, and may be what has you so terribly confused.
It's because science is the opposite of any religion which has an official text that cannot, must not, be changed or the whole doctrine comes tumbling down -- that's not science.
Instead science is all about finding new evidence that may confirm or falsify existing ideas, hypotheses & theories.
And that may (or may not) be what's going on here with this alleged "Dragon Man (Homo longi)".
Anyway, Bergman's article mentions two skulls, the first is not new:
- Dragon Man (Homo longi) was discovered in 1933 and has been handled so much since that its origin & provenance may never be reliably proved.
It was finally brought to Chinese paleontologists in 2018.
It is said to be 146,000 years old and may or may not be similar to other pre-human remains of that period, i.e., Dali-man discovered in 1978. - The Nesher-Ramla homo partial skull was first identified this year in Israel, is also around 140,000 years old and is thought possibly a cross-breed between Neanderthals and homo-sapiens, though that is not confirmed.
One problem is, the significance of "Dragon Man" may be more political than scientific, since the Chi-Com government insists Chinese evolved separately in China and so did not migrate from Africa or Europe.
Chi-coms hope this 1933-discovered skull can somehow "prove" their political assertions.
Almost nobody outside China buys it.
But that may be helping to confuse our poor author, Jerry Bergman.