I said Trump is a ped0 like fellow Biden and Clinton, and I had no issues with a black elf. And also, arguing with some *******s who said Ancient Egyptians were actually white

lol

I saw him denying that Irish and English people are largely descendants of King Tut earlier.

Seemed pretty unbased considering I think there was evidence behind that claim in a thread

lmao

https://www.reuters.com/article/ouko...7704OR20110801

Illuminati crew - hope this doesn't shatter your agenda boyo

https://www.livescience.com/15388-di...hamen-dna.html

"Dr. Albert Zink from the EURAC [European Academy of Bolzano, an independent research center] in Bolzano and co-author of the 2010 JAMA publication screened the footage and confirmed that the company acts very unscientific," Pusch wrote in an email to LiveScience. "The Swiss company did not try to get into contact with us prior to launching their new Internet page."

"It appears that they try to better sell their DNA testing kit by using the media attention connected to King Tut."

Not that the later dynasties even matter to the OP's claims about Ancient Egyptians.

Also - "They did not publish all the Y-chromosome data, and according to a statement on the iGENEA website 'despite several demands, the results of the Y-DNA tests have been shut away'. Scholz claims that this data, which is only passed down through the male side of a family, was what appeared in the documentary.

If Tutankhamun does belong to the Rb1ba2 group this suggests he is descended from an ancestor who lived in the Black Sea region around 9,500 years ago. It is thought that this group migrated to Europe around 7,000 years ago with the spread of agriculture, but how some could have ended up in Egypt is unknown.

iGENEA has now launched the Tutankhamun DNA Project, offering a discount on your DNA profile if you turn out to be a close living, male relative of the king."

So they didn't release the full data, and they're suggesting a common ancestor BEFORE that group moved to Europe. But they won't publish the full data because it's a marketing ploy to get cucks to buy their test.

COPE

Haplogroup R1B1A2 (R-V88) is a West Asian Haplogroup
https://academic.oup.com/hmg/article...64?login=false

King TUT and his family:

Yuya Y-DNA G2A, MTDNA K

Tjuyu MTDNA K

Amenhotep 111 Y-DNA R1B, MTDNA H2B

Queen Tiye MTDNA K

Akhenaten Y-DNA R1B

King Tut Y-DNA R1B MTDNA K

All the above are West Asian Haplogroups in origin.

All green and I'm not even a good poster.

This Pusch guy is probably triggered his research group didnt make the discovery when they were the ones with the original data lol. That's why he's casting doubt on it. The scientific community is very competitive and there's a lot of academic envy on who publishes what

The Swiss company may have drawn a conclusion in an unscientific way (from a Discovery channel snippet of his Y chromosome data that the research group discovered) but it doesn't mean its wrong. Srs

That article isn't very convincing

Yes, it does mean it's wrong because the last full study that has been published and peer reviewed was in 2020 and linked above. Are you actually retarded? srs

Laughing hard at the bold bit though brah, I mean wtf? Taking a snapshot off the discovery channel and reconstructing it, and then refusing to publish their data. Sounds like a scam, and it is. Because of actual subsequent studies. But the cope is STRONG.

Repped.

You edited that last article in. Cliffs

Nah, I edited this bit:Cliffs are that edit: He's not European in origin at all.

Linked again in case you want to read -https://academic.oup.com/hmg/article...64?login=false

The question isn't ifhisorigin is from Europeans, the question is ifEuropeanorigin is related to him

Lmao

Retard, the OP was claiming that Ancient Egyptians were "white". The other claim that Europeans were related to him is secondary. Both are wrong.

Holy **** you're dumb as **** lmfao

You were denying the secondary claim tho. Which is the only one I've been arguing

Who's dumb again?

Both claims, retard. It doesn't matter which one you're arguing because it's the same data that shows it's wrong.

COPE harder you giant ****ggot

Just because you say it isn't true doesn't make it so

You've provided no evidence that it isn't, only a poorly written and unconvincing article with zero evidence

I mean jesus christ, that article is almost unreadable

Urine idiot

Look at the paper, you dumbass.

Quote me where it refutes claims about modern Europeans ancestry being related to King tut. I'll wait while you type out another ad hominem

You don't seem to understand causality

Hence why you got negged and called retarded

So the claim is about the haplogroup and not him directly now?

The COPE here is deranged

We going back to common ancestors? lmao

Retarded, like I said before. You got caught out on some scam press release that was picked up by some papers than ran a sensationalist story meant to drive sales for a DNA test.

WE WUZ RELATED AND SHEEEIT

Just admit you're wrong about King Tut being related to modern Europeans. Stop embarrassing yourself

The article is false you dumb *******, the claim is wrong. Direct descendants won't work with this, you ****ggot. It's not like Genghis Khan who had multitudes of children and it can all be traced back to some degree to his hordes and him.

I agree, the LiveScience article is false. it's just some guy saying "I don't think so" because his group missed the findings despite having the original data, i.e. he's embarrassed he didn't find it lmao

The Reuters article claim was always about the haplogroup but you didn't know that because you just started spouting off before you even read it

Wtf are you so adamant about this anyway?

Once again *******, an actual peer reviewed study

https://academic.oup.com/hmg/article...64?login=false

What you're doing is deranged. You could make the exact same claim to any Indo-Aryan figures in history and say modern Europeans are related to them. It's retarded and nobody does that.

Not reading that, I seriously doubt that you have either. If you did you could give cliffs

The only small part I skimmed off it was Tut was born of incest and had genetic defects. Wow, strong finding bro

Okay ****ggot

What's your connection to this chit anyways? Are you just a dumb shill?

[QUOTE=Silencespeaks post_id=1667440483][url=https://ibb.co/TP414VT][img][/QUOTE]
Lol.

who had drinks with RLA?

In on SRT