<HTML>Hi Don,
I'll reply more later. Just a quick word on <i>Homo sapiens</i>. In plaeoanthropological circles there are different terminology available, all equally valid:
1. <i>Homo sapien sapiens</i> and <i>Homo sapien neanderthalensis</i>
2. <i>Homo sapiens sapiens</i> and <i>Homo neanderthalensis</i>
3. <i>Homo sapiens</i> and <i>Homo neanderthalensis</i>
Further confusion arises when people use the generic term <i>archaic Homo sapiens</i> to describe intermediaries between </i>Homo erectus</i> and anatomically modern humans. This generic term, which I am often guilty of using in public for the sake of simplification, is not technically accurrate - a better term is <i>Homo heidelbergensis</i>.
As if that isn't complicated enough, some palaeoanthropologists and archaeologists argue that <i>Homo heidelbergensis</i> is confined to Europe and the archaic African specimens are those of <i>Homo helmei</i> and <i>Homo rhodesensis</i>.
Anyone confused yet? lol
Mike.</HTML>
