Archangel, the reason people say you are lying is because the site you linked to support that neanderthal is "just human". Notice that their format is like that: first they tell what the fossil were supposed to be, then they tell what they REALLY were. In the case of the neanderthal, they first say that neanderthal was supposed to be an apelike being and then "RECOGNISED" to be just human remains (it's the "just a human/ape" argument that you use yourself). I think though that those arguments are secondary to the topic.
Just a remainder: you are supposed to FIRST FIND a fraud that is used or has been used to further public's acceptance of evolution. ONLY AFTER THAT, we can discuss whether those were really frauds. If you only find frauds, it is useless if they were not used to convince the public's acceptance. For example, I (and many others) have only ever heard of Piltdown man in this particuliar debate, which means that it couldn't have been used to convince the public SINCE THE PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT IT.
™ Version 4.2
