Re: An EVEN MORE IMPORTANT FOSSIL...

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: John Waters: "Re: An alternative to ST and AAT"
• Previous message: Jos€ Herculano: "Re: Why is Homo sapiens hairless?"

In article <susansfE15MK8.Jz3@netcom.com>, susansf@netcom.com (Susan S. Chin) writes:
|> Thanks for the reference. The version of the NY Times article I downloaded
|> actually contained a horribly glaring error... I'm curious if it appeared
|> in the paper version as well? Towards the end of the article, the author,
|> John Wilkes Noble, mentions that anatomically modern Homo sapiens
|> appeared 200 million to 100 million years ago. Now if that isn't a typo,
|> I'm not sure what is!

The error was in the paper version (p. C-5). Wednesday the NYT, always trying
to be punctilious in the matters, published a correction : 200,000 to 100,000
years.

Daan Sandee
Burlington, MA Use this email address: sandee (at) cmns . think . com

• Next message: John Waters: "Re: An alternative to ST and AAT"
• Previous message: Jos€ Herculano: "Re: Why is Homo sapiens hairless?"