re babirusa species, I can't accept the different forms as being separate species. For starters, the Buru babirusa (for example) was introduced to that island by people within probably the last several hundred years, and yet it is being claimed as a different species from the Sulawesi ones from which it is derived! In my opinion the taxonomists today are simply splitting every single thing they can find on the bases of often very minor or superficial differences, either genetic or physical. It often seems that this is a political thing, in-as-much as a distinct species garners more attention towards its protection than a subspecies. Something many lay-people (no offence to anyone) forget or do not realise is that just because an author publishes a paper in which he/she splits/lumps a given species, that doesn't then make that decision set in stone. It is often the case that papers are published, the results are taken up by some but disregarded by others in the same field. Different taxonomists have different views, the same as in any other discipline.
