From Wikipedia entry on Calaveras skull, a modern-human-like skull found buried at a depth that would otherwise indicate its antiquity, dismissed as a hoax. Why:
Anthropologist William Henry Holmes of the Smithsonian Institution investigated around the turn of the century. He determined that the plant and animal fossils that had been discovered near the skull were indeed genuine, but the skull was too modern and concluded that “to suppose that man could have remained unchanged… for a million years, roughly speaking… is to suppose a miracle.”
So the depth of the skull discovered is evidence of its age, which would contradict the evolutionist claim that modern man did not live alongside other “ancient” species found in those strata. But evolution would have it that creatures change over time, so if the fossil was so “old,” it wouldn’t look so much like modern man. Perhaps that would be evidence that the strata are not as old as evolutionists require it to be for their theory to work (which it doesn’t anyway). But, no, rather, the requirement of the theory to have millions of years rather invalidates the “modern” skull. So it must not be real. Anyone else see the faulty reasoning here? It seems it is this kind of bias that drives much of the “evidence” for evolution.