Well, I don't care because you're arguing in fact about what shade of brown or black Tut would have been. In my opinion the answer does not add anything whatsoever to the overall picture of the time period. Nor does it really tell us anything about him.


And personally I just find any race debate somewhat distasteful because race arguments are usually not used for the greater good, if you know what I mean. It has nothing to do with fear, but everything to do with the recognition that the outdated theories about race have caused a lot of damage throughout history (and in the present).
Race is just a very superficial way of dividing up humans in several categories.

And my gripe was mainly with the logic and the arguments employed.

I personally prefer thinking about many other questions
Who was regent for Tut when he was small? (Assuming that due to his age he had to have a regent).
How far was he able to go in his return to orthodoxy after the Amarna age?
What were the respective roles of Aye and Horemheb precisely during his role?
Was General Nakhtmin really the son of Aye? If so, was he groomed as crown-prince?
How long did it take the Amun priesthood to get back on it's feet? Where did the resources come from to pay for all of that? Any signs of very heavy taxes on say Nubia?

I think I'll shut up now

I don't think Danielle was trying to take it in that direction, Psussenes I. That's not her style. She was just trying to express that people are different and cannot all be lumped together, and in that light she is correct. Physiologically speaking there numerous differences between the different races of the world. And it's an oversimplification to suggest we all want and need the same things. A young man of the Masai is not going to be terribly interested in climbing the corporate ladder of a Fortune 500 company any more than a Wall Street type in New York is hoping to acquire a sufficient herd of cattle for the sake of a dowry. Our wants and needs are determined by our nation, our culture, our family, and our upbringing, and by how all of these external factors influence us as individuals.

There's nothing negative about saying any of this because it's the truth. When we start looking at the human value of a person based on his or her ethnicity or background, then we sink into racist thinking. "Breeds" was the wrong word to use, an innocent mistake.

Inherited traits do NOT create "different breeds".
There are many things we inherit from our parents: blood type, height, susceptibility to heart disease, susceptibility to certain types of cancer, skin color, wether we go bald at a young age, and many many more.

I inherited an illness from my mother (as did my sister). We all had surgery and live happily ever after. This does not mean we're some "different breed" even though it's genetic

I agree with you Psusennes. I wish people would get past this as well

The human genome is wonderfully diverse and we should just enjoy it without trying to "rank" people.

LOL There's actually an advertisement on here in the USA where the question is asked what we do with the other 1 percent.