Re: 30,000 year old Homo erectus

Phillip Bigelow (
Sun, 15 Dec 1996 19:18:59 -0800

T&B Schmal wrote:
> Experts in this group are forever digging up
> the most obscure findings to support their positions - you would think a
> famous "Science" publication would get some creative juices going.
> Perhaps the reason no one has commented is that no one has previously
> staked their reputations on a position that the new finding would
> support. Therefore it is useless.

Or, in my case, it is because I haven't got a chance to look at the
_Science_ article, yet.
Although, I *did* appreciate and chuckle over your rather
imaginative "conspiricy-of-suppression" theory!