Neandethal Bones dated 2.5 mya

How would we test this proposition? You'd have to find one first.However, it does not take long for a creationist lie to spread round the Internet. Therefore, this can't be a standard piece of creationist crap.

I think I've figured it out. The civics teacher hasn't learned his lines properly.I think what he's trying to repeat is the creationist bibble about the skull KNM-ER 1470. This is not a Neanderthal, it is Homo rudolphensis (or Homo habilis, or Australopithicus rudolphensis --- intemediate forms are kinda hard to classify).When it was found, it was dated at 2.9 mya. At the time, this was a puzzle, because that made it older than any known australopithecine. This is, of course, why creationists started babbling about it, because, as we know, every unsolved puzzle in biology is a proof that EVIL-UTION IS A LIE!!!Since then, older australopithecines have been found (older than 3 mya, see the graph below) and the original date of KNM-ER 1470 has also been corrected: