That is also BS on numerous levels, not the least being the question of whether our planet is even one million years old.
One of America's best mathematicians over the last century, Robert Bass, actually redid Lord Kelvin's heat equations for the planet WITH a maximal figure for radioactive materials, and got an outer bound of around 200M years, and got thrown out of BYU for the exercise (disruptive technology or some such).
The people claiming these "common ancestors(TM)" for us and Neanderthals are generally the same people still claiming a 60M year antiquity for dinosaurs DESPITE all the new evidence of meat, blood cells, blood vessels, skin cells and what not turning up in dinosaur remains as well as the one nearly complete hadrosaur and the internet age providing us with knowledge of Amerind petroglyphs showing known dinosaur types, e.g.
That of course is the stegosaur (water panther) glyph at Massinaw, Lake Superior, horns added centuries later; Amerind oral traditions describe the creature as having a sawblade back, red fur, and a "great spiked tail" for use as a weapon.
We don't have much of anything which you'd call Neanderthal art work or images of actual Neanderthals. Nonetheless this is a recent (Jay Matternes)reconstruction:
and certain statues from the Indus Valley civilization show a remarkable similarity:
And then you get to Gunnar Heinsohn's "Wie Alt ist das Menschengeschlect" and his description of the problem with the manner in which Neanderthal stratigraphies have been interpreted:
"Mueller-Karpe, the first name in continental paleoanthropology, wrote thirty years ago on the two strata of homo erectus at Swanscombe/England: "A difference between the tools in the upper and in the lower stratum is not recognizable. (From a geological point of view it is uncertain if between the two strata there passed decades, centuries or millennia.)" (Handbuch der Vorgeschichte, Vol I, Munich 1966, p. 293).The outstanding scholar never returned to this hint that in reality there may have passed ten years where the textbooks enlist one thousand years. Yet, I tried to follow this thread. I went to the stratigraphies of the Old Stone Age which usually look as follows
* modern man (homo sapiens sapiens)
* Neanderthal man (homo sapiens neanderthalensis)
* Homo erectus (invents fire and is considered the first intelligent man).
In my book "Wie alt ist das Menschengeschlecht?" [How Ancient is Man?], 1996, 2nd edition, I focused for Neanderthal man on his best preserved stratigraphy: Combe Grenal in France. Within 4 m of debris it exhibited 55 strata dated conventionally between -90,000 and -30,000.
Roughly one millennium was thus assigned to some 7 cm of debris per stratum. Close scrutiny had revealed that most strata were only used in the summer. Thus, ca. one thousand summers were assigned to each stratum. If, however, the site lay idle in winter and spring one would have expected substratification. Ideally, one would look for one thousand substrata for the one thousand summers. Yet, not even two substrata were discovered in any of the strata. They themselves were the substrata in the 4 m stratigraphy. They, thus, were not good for 60,000 but only for 55 years.
I tested this assumption with the tool count. According to the Binfords' research--done on North American Indians--each tribal adult has at least five tool kits with some eight tools in each of them. At every time 800 tools existed in a band of 20 adults. Assuming that each tool lasted an entire generation (15 female years), Combe Grenals 4,000 generations in 60,000 years should have produced some 3.2 million tools. By going closer to the actual life time of flint tools tens of millions of tools would have to be expected for Combe Grenal. Ony 19,000 (nineteen thousand) remains of tools, however, were found by the excavators.
There seems to be no way out but to cut down the age of Neanderthal man at Combe Grenal from some 60,000 to some 60 years.
I applied the stratigraphical approach to the best caves in Europe for the entire time from Erectus to the Iron Age and reached at the following tentative chronology for intelligent man:
* -600 onwards Iron Age
* -900 onwards Bronze Age
* -1400 beginning of modern man (homo sapiens sapiens)
* -1500 beginning of Neanderthal man
* between -2000 and -1600 beginning of Erectus.
Since Erectus only left the two poor strata like at Swanscombe or El-Castillo/Spain, he should actually not have lasted longer than Neanderthal-may be one average life expectancy. I will now not go into the mechanism of mutation. All I want to remind you of is the undisputed sequence of interstratification and monostratification in the master stratigraphies. This allows for one solution only: Parents of the former developmental stage of man lived together with their own offspring in the same cave stratum until they died out. They were not massacred as textbooks have it:
* monostrat.: only modern man's tools
* interstrat.: Neanderthal man's and modern man's tools side by side
* monostrat.: only Neanderthal man's tools
* interstrat.: Neanderthal man's and Erectus' tools side by side
* monotstrat.: only Erectus tools
* (deepest stratum for intelligent man)
The year figures certainly sound bewildering. Yet, so far nobody came up with any stratigraphy justifiably demanding more time than I tentatively assigned to the age of intelligent man. I always remind my critics that one millennium is an enormous time span--more than from William the Conqueror to today's Anglo-World. To add a millenium to human history should always go together with sufficient material remains to show for it. I will not even mention the easiness with which scholars add a million years to the history of man until they made Lucy 4 million years old. The time-span-madness is the last residue of Darwinism."
Note that Heinsohn is essentially providing maximal age figures which stratigraphic evidence could actually support. That is not exactly the same thing as claiming that neanderthals arose a couple of thousand years before Christ but when you combine this picture with the dinosaur petroglyphs and the images from Harappa and Mohenjo Dara, then you begin to comprehend that the time for us to be descended from hominids is simply not there, and the claims of us and hominids having any sort of a common ancestor 700,000 years back are basically ridiculous