[VadeRetro]

Could this be because the fossils no longer exist (Peking Man or Java Man, I forget which) and there is no way to evaluate them, or because specimens, supposedly of the same individuals, were found many yards apart, and may be a mix of human and ape bones?

The original batch of Peking Man fossils were lost in WWII, but similar finds are still being made in China. Now considered a subvariety of H. erectus, a very widespread and well-represented species. Any controversy exists mainly in the minds and cult literature of the creationists.

... specimens, supposedly of the same individuals, were found many yards apart, and may be a mix of human and ape bones?

This charge is sometimes applied to Lucy, but you're probably thinking of the times it has been leveled against Java Man, the skullcap of which was indeed found in a mix of bones from different animals including a more modern human femur.

[Dimensio]

This charge is sometimes applied to Lucy

I'm honestly surprised that it's not tossed out here on FR every now and then. Sure, the claim has been thorougly discredited, but that hasn't stopped some people from presenting similarly discredited claims.

[far sider]

Thanks for saving me the trouble of looking up Java and Peking. And thanks for confirming that am right. As a so-called creation cultist, I have no problem with Homo erectus. They are clearly human as the name implies. Their cranial capacities are with the human range, etc. (I do have a problem with H. habilis, though.)

I was responding to your claim that creationists can't make up their minds as to whether Java and Peking Man were human or ape. I think you're being disingenuous, if you really mean to say that serious creationists (rather than some amateur who doesn't really know the subject) can't decide if a whole class of hominids is human or not.