Regarding "lack of evidence," which Bex continues to claim . . . in an earlier post I said,

Quote
And at this site, you can see how a series of hominid fossils from Spain, species homo antecessor, was dated using not only paleomagnetism but also electron spin resonance (ESR) and uranium-series results on teeth. The dates derived from all of these methods corresponded. They show that the fossils are more than 780,000 years old.


Please explain to me:

Why these three dating techniques are wrong. Or why it's OK to think, "I don't understand anything about them, but they're wrong."

Why these fossils are sorted in such a way that no homo antecessor fossils appear with dinosaurs, or trilobites.

What the morphological differences are between homo antecessor and modern humans are, and why homo antecessor is necessarily classified as a separate species.

Let me know when you're ready to explain how all this is nothing more than "wishful thinking." Or if, as the case increasingly seems to be, your sole argument is "it's all lies," I think we need to stop trying to discuss science and evidence with you here because clearly you are not ready or willing to do so.