Re: homo species

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Mathew Shember: "Re: Sex roles: are we like the chimps?"
• Previous message: Ralph L Holloway: "Re: Question on skull structure."
• Maybe in reply to: Howard Wiseman: "homo species"
• Next in thread: Harry Erwin: "Re: homo species"

In <3tkd0t$ls4@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> aduncan@mail.utexas.edu writes:

[...........]

`
` Relationships between Homo species, and between Homo and Australopithecus
` have not been resolved to anyone's satisfaction. Here's a consensus
` view. Things that ALMOST everyone agrees on don't have question marks.
`
` Homo sapiens
` | Homo neanderthalensis
` | |
` | |
` | |
` | |
` | |
`
` ?"Archaic Homo sapiens"
` includes H. heidelbergensis
` |
` |

I guess I must be getting out of date. Is there no longer any support
for these being
Homo sapiens sapiens
" " neandertalensis
" " heidelbergensis ?

==========================================================================
vincent@triumf.ca <== faster % Pete Vincent
vincent@freenet.vancouver.bc.ca % Disclaimer: all I know I
% learned from reading Usenet.

• Next message: Mathew Shember: "Re: Sex roles: are we like the chimps?"
• Previous message: Ralph L Holloway: "Re: Question on skull structure."
• Maybe in reply to: Howard Wiseman: "homo species"
• Next in thread: Harry Erwin: "Re: homo species"