There is one possible way that C. doesn't look as bad as you suggest (just really really bad at reading which we know).
He may have been involved or stumbled upon some discussion of dinosaurs and humans being contemporary today not 65+ Mya. This could be, if stewed along with other false ideas long enough be turned into what we see now.
See previous post. I wasn't trying to imply anything, just thinking that conclusions were being drawn rather quickly
Something like: abnormal limb ratio+5claws instead of 2 = Transitional fossil = Evolution is true.
I see no sign of that here or elsewhere.
What we see is a century and some of gathering data and finding that it overwhelmingly supports the ToE. Then we have someone suggesting some tiny, wee, small detail is an "atom bomb" refuting it all.
What is being pointed out is that the specimen is exactly the kind of thing that the ToE leads us to expect and there is nothing about it that is evidence against evolutionary biolgy. It doesn't "prove" anything it is simple one of what is now millions of details which support the theories.