They presented it as it is.... a theory.... that will hold up or not with further study. That is what science is, the study of things.... Some things that are proved, some things smart people may disagree on, and some things still baffle us.
The knee-jerk emotional dissmissal of this theory is much less scientific than the original theory. And presented here with much more *certainty* as fact.
And as we all know, there is what we call "exact science", hypotheses that can be proved, or reproduced through experiment, etc. There are different forms of science. The people who try to present these ape/man/origin-of-man theories as exact science need to be exposed. And judging by the rage of some these pseudo scientists, I can see they don't like to have their misrepresentations torn apart by logic and reason. They present their findings, but festoon them in a fashion that attempts to confuse the reader into thinking their theory has been proven by exact science, it's all smoke and mirrors. That chimps have a 99% similar DNA to humans means nothing to the origin of man, especially when you consider that cats have a 90% similar DNA to humans. And even more so when you consider the fact that science itself has never held DNA to be the indicator of human origin. There are so many presumptions, presppositions and holes in this "scientific" argument that it's like Swiss cheese. As for me, science itself proves the existence of God, just as the Masterpiece proves the existence of an artist. Pax Chrisi.