Soon after Berger and colleagues published the discovery of H. naledi in the rather obscure journal eLife, some anthropologists voiced their scepticism of its inclusion in the human family tree. They even doubted that all the bones and pieces belonged to the same species.
This scepticism hasn’t gone away. And the fossils were never dated.
However, it seems that Darwinists can come up with a date for fossils without actually dating them. In their method, the evolutionary tail wags the Darwinian dog:
Mark Collard, a biological anthropologist at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia and his colleagues developed a computer model with which they could analyse skull, jaw and tooth features of assumed human ancestors.
The model suggests a date of 912,000 years BP for H. naledi, which would make it too young for a human ancestor, as the oldest specimens of the fully-human H. erectus are much older.