There does seem to be a lot of problems with the state of the ground at the site. One side argues that the tools were found under an unbroken layer of ash, the other that this is false. I suppose it's probably best to discount the site until or unless better information becomes available. I'm also a bit suspicious that the later reports on the site come from a man called Sam van Landingham, a creationist. I know this doesn't automatically discredit his views and I know he published a peer reviewed paper, but given the significance of this site to conspiracy theorists, it does seem a bit strange that both he and Steen McIntyre are hostile to evolution.
That's interesting. This site does seem very strange, particularly the fact that all the tools were made from non local materials. Wasn't the site also supposed to have been quite difficult to date for some reason? I'm no expert but I think I've heard that.
I was just reading something you posted a while ago about the Hueyatlaco date controversy and I was wondering if you have been able to refute it since then. Of course I agree with you that we need to be careful about refuting it just because we don't like it.