GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266707345


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] TMRCA of R1b1b2s to King Tut?
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 15:09:05 -0800
References: <mailman.6024.1266702732.2099.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com><CC3BDEBBD73A4CE99CAA14FAB4C530D9@anatoldesktop>
In-Reply-To: <CC3BDEBBD73A4CE99CAA14FAB4C530D9@anatoldesktop>


If by "you know who" you mean me (DKF) then there is a deficit in following
the stream of a post. Someone else found that the closest match was a
U-152, and I merely commented - in jest because it is folly to predict most
R1b1b2 haplogroups from a haplotype - some exceptions. I freely admit that
it would be helpful to my research to know that U152 has been observed in
northeastern Africa at the time of the Pharoahs - this would be a
potentially very important finding that could change the current views on
the origin and migration of this and other related haplogroups. In terms of
"wishful thinking" I only wish for the truth to surface quickly. Period.

David K. Faux.

On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Anatole Klyosov <>wrote:

> >From: "Tom Gull" <>
> >The numbers you show below relate to my point, and my point related only
> to
> the "wishful thinking" nature of saying King Tut was U152 based on evidence
> presented so far.
>
>
> Dear Tom,
>
> I am with you. If that "wishful thinking" was related to U152 as the
> subclade suggested for King Tut based on... well, nothing, you are
> absolutely right. Since you know who actually suggested it, based on....
> well, nothing, you are absolutely right again.
>
> Regards,
>
> Anatole Klyosov
>
> ************************************
>


This thread: