Yeah? So? They were never claimed to be Java Man, they were claimed to be Homo Erectus. If I found the remains of Homo Erectus in Paris, the result would not be "Paris Man." Once more, your inability to process even basic concepts when dealing with this theory do not speak well of your understanding of it.
The article you posted, as I pointed out already, was so unscientific (or perhaps so deceitful) that it never identified what the fossils were originally classified as. What we do know is that it was re-dated based on (tara) some teeth, of some animal, found near the site of the original find - decades after the fossil was found. In other words, the whole thing smells to high heaven.