SolomonW wrote:
It is not so new, but interesting
It's sort of like they're using the conventional work to prove
the DNA, then claim that the DNA proves the conventional
work.
It's interesting in regards to the questions they don't answer.
Hatshepsut, for instance, boasted of sending an expedition to Punt.
But if there was trade then why would she even have to?
And when exactly do we start seeing worship of the baboon?
What's the oldest baboon remains they can find in Egypt, how does
this DNA fit in?
My biggest concern is that modern distribution does not match
ancient populations. That, humans drove them extinct in some
places and, by collecting & trading in them, introduced them to
new areas. Or swamped local gene pools with imported members.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/637988555155701760
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)