How will the creationists misintrepret this find?
There is already some misunderstanding in the actual news article: "and has radically altered the accepted picture of human evolution."
I was actually hoping we could use it in the opposite way, as a demonstration to creationists arguing the misconception that scientists never go against existing evidence. From the Brown, et al., abstract in Nature:
Importantly, H. floresiensis shows that the genus Homo is
morphologically more varied and flexible in its adaptive responses than previously thought.
A clear statement of potential revision of a hypothesis.
™ Version 4.2
