You come across a website that states Homo rudolfensis was a slightly larger version of Homo habilis, found in Canada in the eighteenth century. Based on your knowledge of biological anthropology, how do you know that this website is bunk?

Homo rudolfensis was discovered in 1972 at Lake Turkana in Kenya. At first, scientists thought this species was the same as Homo habilis because their remains indicated that they lived during the same period of time.

However, they found several differences, especially a size difference in regard to their face, braincase, and molar and premolar teeth, in which larger features belonged to Homo rudolfensis.

I wouldn't trust this website because of several reasons:

According to research, there is a strong debate that indicates they might just be different sexes, which would explain the size difference.
Other sources indicate their differences are so strong, they are indeed different species but lived during the same period. Therefore, we cannot just state that H. rudolfensis was a 'slightly' larger version of H. habilis. These differences are detailed below:

Homo rudolfensis: square upper jaw; Homo habilis: rounded upper jaw.
Homo rudolfensis: not-strongly developed brow ridge; Homo habilis: strongly developed brow ridge.
Homo rudolfensis: flat and long face; Homo habilis: small and non-flat face.

In addition, all trustworthy websites should include scientific facts that are backed up by sources such as (recent) scientific articles.