Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Fractal Trader
The article cites the journal “Nature”

my puter will not load the whole page. I'll keep looking. I thought it was interesting that they said King Tut was first Irish and then half of Europe was related to him.

12 posted on 08/20/2014 2:59:28 PM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: mountainlion
I'll keep looking. I thought it was interesting that they said King Tut was first Irish and then half of Europe was related to him.

King Tut appears to be Celtic. This does not mean that his ancestors lived in Ireland. It means that the same people that Tut was descended from ultimately migrated there.

Regarding the argument that "Egyptians were Africans", agriculture was first developed somewhere around Iraq. I could see people spreading out from there in search of fertile farming land, finding the Nile valley, and displacing/killing any black Africans they found. Thus, while living in Africa, they would be no more "African" than the whites of South Africa.

19 posted on 08/20/2014 3:13:32 PM PDT by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson