[starfish923]

400,000 years ago?
They weren't cro-magnan then. They were simply hominids (not homo sapiens) who eventually disappeared from the gene pool.
All we are is cro-magnan, from 75,000-100,000 years ago.
Cro-magnan and Neaderthals (also just hominids, NOT homo sapiens) DID co-exist on Europe for a while. I do honestly believe that some remnants of Neaderthals still exist in our gene pool, thanks to mixing of the species. That is clearly evident in some the Democrat left wingers. Brain not all there.

[Ichneumon]

Cro-magnan and Neaderthals (also just hominids, NOT homo sapiens) DID co-exist on Europe for a while. I do honestly believe that some remnants of Neaderthals still exist in our gene pool, thanks to mixing of the species. That is clearly evident in some the Democrat left wingers. Brain not all there.

Case in point:

[mlc9852]

There are some scientists who don't think Neanderthals really existed.

[calex59]

They weren't cro-magnan then. They were simply hominids (not homo sapiens) who eventually disappeared from the gene pool.

Hidelbergenis and Homo Erectus are thought to be one and the same by many scientists. Because of the paucity of remains found, they cannot be sure,nor can they be sure that the remains are of the people who actually made the tools. Homo Erectus has been found over most of Europe, Asia and Africa. Remains have been found that date up to 10,000 years before present, side by side with Cro-magnan and Neanderthals. Homo Erectus has a skeleton that is human in every way,slightly smaller cranium, and dates back to about 500,000 years before present depending on who you are talking too. A Homo Erectus Skeleton found at Turkana, well here is a quote from a book about Archeology:

The most famous of the Homo erectus specimens found in Africa is the fossil of "Narikotome Homo erectus ," or the "Turkana Boy," which was found near Lake Turkana in Kenya. It is confirmed that the fossil was that of a 12-year-old boy, who would have been 1.83 meters tall in adolescence. The upright skeletal structure of the fossil is no different from that of modern man. The American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker said that he doubted that "the average pathologist could tell the difference between the fossil skeleton and that of a modern human."

So, many different takes on the remains found over the world and in England. If you find a part of a skull and some teeth you can hardly base a theory on them, or even really project how the species looked or were formed. This happens all too often and should be taken with a grain of salt. Until they find more remains, more bones, then they are just speculating as to what/who these people were.

Sorry if I rambled on here but I am fasinated about this subject and do a lot of reading on it. Thanks for letting me talk.