Friday, July 6, 2018

The Table of Nations and Genetic Identifications


There hasn't been much effort by Christians who hold to a Biblical model of  history and genetics to identify the Table of Nations in Genesis 10. One person who has is Richard P. Aschmann who roots his tree on the identification of J1 y-dna with the Jewish Cohenim descended from Aaron and that E-y-dna with Ham because of its presence in Africa. However if he is wrong in these two identifications (which I believe he is) then his understanding of the y-dna tree and its connection with the Table of Nations will be false. Aschmann uses the ideas of Leif A Bostrom for his understanding of the y-dna tree.


Others have claimed that J y-dna is the Israelites haplogroup and I y-dna are the lost Tribes. Others that R y-dna is that of the Tribes of Joseph wth R1b as Ephraim and R1a as Manesseh and the Jews and Arabs are IJ y-dna. Others hold that R1b are the Israelites and R1a are the Edomites. However many of these people have not tried to fit the entire y-dna tree into their identifications.

In regards to J1 y-dna Bostrom and Aschmann's logic is if the dna marker of the Jewish Cohenim is J1 then Aaron must be J1 y-dna and thus all Israelites must be J1 y-dna. It is clear that not only do some Jewish Cohenim have J1 y-dna but so do the Arabs and especially Mohammed's family and his descendants, so do the Samaritans and many other Jews who are not Cohenim as well as many Greeks and Italians. There are other groups of Cohenim who are not J1 y-dna and there are two distinct clusters of R1b Cohenim that can also make a serious claim to being descended from Aaron. Also E y-dna is not from Ham as it is linked with D y-dna which has no African connection. DE are the descendants of Japheth. Most other researchers would agree with me that F is Shemite and I believe F,C is Shemite. Thus this leaves only A and B who both happened to be in Africa and thus are the Hamite haplogroups. However Aschmann and Bostrom believe that F is Hamite.

The problem with many of these identifications is they try to link modern Europeans to its post flood population of Japhethites. This was first accepted by both Jewish and Christians writers who sought to link the nations of their own day with the Table of Nations. Unfortunately they didn't take into account that the Japhethite names given for different parts of Europe had been depopulated of their original Japhethite inhabitants and the names used by the new inhabitants descended from Shem after the Ice Age ended. Genetic research demonstrates that Europe's population is very different today from earlier times. In fact after the Ice Age ended in Europe Shemite peoples of F (the Black Hebrew sons of Joktan) and C1 (the Black Shemites of the sons of Charran) as well as I y-dna (Dark White (Tan) sons of Ishmael) entered Europe. 

The only Japhethite population of any significance in Europe today is E1b y-dna (Javanites) who returned later after the Ice Ages. E-V13 y-dna (around 200 BC) is the marker of the Greeks who descended from the southern Atlanteans (E-P2 y-dna) who ruled southern Europe and Northern Africa. Many more Atlanteans spread into Europe and Africa with the sinking of their homeland in the 10th century BC. The spread of E-V13 y-dna (descended from the Rodanim or Dodanim clan of E-V68 y-dna) from Greece occurred during the time of the Greco-Roman Empire. The Atlantean Philistines were the Kittim (E-P2, E-Z827) who are also the so-called Natufian culture found in Israeli archeology. Just as earlier the southern Atlanteans had pushed many of the remnants of the Tribes of Gomer, Tiras and Ashkenaz into Africa so after the sinking of Atlantis the Rodanim of Atlantis (E-V68) pushed many of the tribes of Tarshish (Spain) of E-M2 y-dna, Elishah (southern Germany/northern Italy) of E-M329 y-dna and Kittim (Italy and Cyprus) of E-Z827 south into Africa. The Tribe of Ashkenaz of E-M44 y-dna settled in northern Europe. One branch of this Tribe moved south into North Africa and another moved east across the Russian steppes (E-Z17699) into Asia where they may have converted to Judaism and joined the Jewish people. They gave their name to the Jews in north eastern Turkey called "Ancient Ashkenaz" that may have joined the Khazar Empire. The Druze may have been a southern migration of these "Ashkenaz" Jews which had the real Ashkenaz as a small percentage among them.

However Aschmann reads the tree in a much more radical way than I do and sees IJK as Noah whereas I believe this is Abraham. He then believes that IJ is Shem and K is Japheth and that the tree upstream of IJK is in fact the Hamite branch. My own belief is that CF on this chart represents Noah and thus CT is in fact AB and represents Ham. Bostrom sees F as Ham.
Leif A Bostrom's y-dna table

I will now discuss some other possible scenarios held by others and how they would connect to the y-dna tree. If  J y-dna represents the Jews and I the Lost Tribes then IJ will represent Jacob and K will represent Esau or Edom. In this case the Lost Tribes will be descended from the I1 y-dna Vikings (Joseph Tribes) and the I2 Sarmatians (other Tribes). In this scenario most of Asia and Europe are thus Edomites. Then IJK would be Isaac and H Ishmael and HIJK Abraham. One would then need to fit this model with all the other nations.

Another scenario would be for IJ to represent the Jews and Judah and K to represent the Lost Tribes and thus IJK would represent Jacob in this model and H Esau. This would mean that the Vikings and Sarmatians of I y-dna could be the Judah-Zerahites. Then HIJK would represent Isaac and G Ishmael. Thus GHIJK would be Abraham in this scenario.

The British Israelites hold that Britain is to be identified with Ephraim and thus Ephraim would need to be the Gaelic R1b L21 which I believe is the y-dna of the Davidic House of Nathan. If this British Israel scenario is correct then the Tribe of Manasseh would be the Saxons (R1b DF19), the Franks (R1b U152) and the Spanish (R1b DF27). Thus R1b P312 would represent Joseph and R1b U106 the Leahite Tribes including Judah. In this scenario Jacob would be R1b L11/P310 or L51, Esau R1b Z2118 or Z2103, Isaac as L51 or L23, Ishmael as Z2103 or PF7562 and Abraham as R1b M269. Thus R1b would most likely in this scenario be Heber and R1a Joktan.

However if R1b P312 is Ephraim then U106 would be Manasseh and thus R1b L11/310  and L51 would represent Joseph and the other Lost Tribes while the Jews and Judah would be R1b Z2103. This may also see R1b as Jacob, R1a as Edom, R as Isaac and Q as Ishmael and thus P would represent Abraham. Thus K would represent Heber and IJ would be Joktan.

Another scenario which is popular with some is that R1b is Ephraim and R1a is Manasseh and thus R represents Joseph. My own theory holds that R1a is Joseph and thus Ephraim is found among the Slavic peoples and Manasseh the Turkic. R1b is the marker of the Tribes descended from Jacob via his wife Leah. Thus in my scenario IJ represents Ishmael.

Over the last 10 years I have been researching on the tribal identifications in connection with genetics and also studying archeology and history in the light of a Biblical model of about 4,500 years of post flood history. I have had to change my ideas many times over this period due to more discoveries and studies. It is still a work in progress and probably always will be but I think this basic identification of the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 to be settled and most likely. However I am always open to the ideas of others if they can situate their identifications into the bigger picture of the whole genetic tree.



Sunday, July 1, 2018

Nahor and G y-dna: Ebla and Mari


Nahor was the brother of Abraham who remained in the land of Charran in Syria. Haplogroup G y-dna descends from him. In the y-dna tree this separation of G ydna from HIJK y-dna is the separation of Nahor and his sons from Abraham (IJK) and Lot the son of Haran (H ydna) and their sons when they left for Canaan. Haplogroup G1 y-dna are the male line descendants of his sons by his concubine Reumah who we could call the Reumahi or Reumahites. Nahor had four sons by Reumah according to the Bible. G2 y-dna are the the male line descendants of his sons by his wife Milcah. Nahor had eight sons by Milcah. Her name Milcah alludes to her milk white skin and her descendants took this white skin mutation into Europe. Some researchers believe that G2a may have brought the fair skin alleles into the European populations whereas other think it was R1 y-dna (R1b and R1a).


G2b y-dna may be the haplogroup of the male line descendants of Laban the grandson of Nahor and brother of Rebecca and father of Rachel, Leah, Bilhah and Zilpah. Some of these sons of Laban are to be found among the Jewish communities. Some of them also settled in Lebanon and Lebanon may have received its name from Laban. The name Laban also means white. Some scholars believe that G2a y-dna are Syrian farmers who moved into Europe before the R1b or R1a y-dna peoples.


Today the G y-dna sons of Nahor live from Western Europe and Northwest Africa to Central Asia, India and East Africa. These Syrian sons of Nahor are found however at low frequencies of 1% and 10% in most places where they are found. However in the Caucasus region, central and southern Italy and Sardinia the frequency rate is from 15% to 30% of male G y-dna lineages. 

The etymology of the name Nahor can be connected with the concepts of to be white, snorting or burning anger. It would seem that the descendants of Nahor were a very proud, fiery and choleric people that moved in as white farmer-warriors into Europe around 950 BC (Alternative Chronology). The Ebla Empire belonged to these G2a y-dna people and it was after the second Ebla's fall that many of them moved into Europe. The first Ebla's fall was probably around 1350 BC (Alternative Chronology). These Eblaite G2a's belong to G2a3 (called G2a2b as well as G-L30) of the Nahorite clans or tribes of Pildash and Jidlaph. G2a1 y-dna belong to the clans of Buz, Uz and Kemuel and the Mari people who fought a century long war with Ebla from about 1450-1350 BC. The first King of Ebla was Saksume (b.1950 BC) a grandson of Nahor Prince of the Hebrews. The first King of Mari was Anbu or Ilshu (b.1960 BC) who was also a grandson of Nahor through his son Buz.

The first Ebla Empire 1950-1350 (Alternative Chronology)

G y-dna descends from the F y-dna of the White Shemites that moved north out of Australia (the third India) after the Black and Red Shemites of C y-dna (Charranites) and the Bronze or Red Japhethites of D y-dna. Charran was a grandson of Arapachshad. These C y-dna Charrani had settled in the middle east in Syria and given it the name Charan or Haran. The southern Charranites intermarried with the black skinned daughters of Nahal (Denisovans) as they moved south into India as C1 y-dna sons of Anda and the northern Charranites intermarried with the bronze skinned daughters of Adan (Neanderthals) or at least they intermarried with the daughters of the bronze skinned Japhethite men of D y-dna, becoming the C2 y-dna sons of Monga. Thus the blonde and red haired with white skin Hebrews of F y-dna stood out when they entered the Charran lands as the majority of the peoples were darker skinned. Also when the blonde haired white skinned sons of Nahor of G2a entered Europe they stood out among the darker skinned inhabitants.

The blonde haired milk-white sons and daughters of the G2a3 Nahorites intermarried with the Massaites of Ishmael (I y-dna) when they entered Europe. Some of the Massaites of I2 y-dna are found in Europe before 950 BC, they arrived in Europe after 1350 BC perhaps from the Levant (Ahmarian culture). The Massaites entered with Europe with or around the same time as those Black Shemites of Charran of C1 y-dna (Andaites).

Thursday, June 21, 2018

Neanderthal y-dna: What is it?

 Reconstruction of a Neanderthal child from Gibraltar

The understanding of Neanderthal man has changed especially with recent dna testing and studies and more discoveries. Instead of the ape like creatures that artists drew of Neanderthal man we now know they were not only like other humans but they were able to interbreed with them.

As I have mentioned before, I hold that Neanderthal is descended from Adan (or Adatanisis) the wife of Japheth who descends from Cain. The mt-dna of Neanderthal and Denisovan men and women are both maternal lineages that do not descend from the so-called mitochondrial Eve who in fact is the wife of Shem. In fact the common mother of these three maternal lineages is the actual Eve who lived about 6,000 years ago. 

While much has been written about the mt-dna of Neanderthal nothing much is said about Neanderthal's y-dna. Claims are made that y-dna is harder to test for in older remains or that the researchers have contaminated the y-dna results. This is mainly said because the researchers don't like the results they get. The same was said about the y-dna of Pharaoh Akhenaten when it was revealed he had R1b M269 y-dna.

The mt-dna results of the Neanderthal from the Denisova Cave is happily accepted but the y-dna rejected as it actually turned out to be R y-dna. This result doesn't fit with the claim that this so-called Altai Neanderthal is 120,000 years old based on evolutionary methodologies of dating artifacts. However if the father is R ydna this doesn't fit as the evolutionary model's claim that R y-dna originated 27,000 years ago. Of course dating by a more Biblical method R y-dna is less than 4,000 years in origin. It was the y-dna of the Patriarch Jacob's children by the full sisters Leah and Rachel with the exception of Rachel's youngest son Benjamin (Q y-dna).

However the earlier mt-dna Neanderthals of Europe (the daughters of Adan) most likely have fathers of E y-dna coming from Japheth's descendants who settled in Europe and D y-dna for those who settled in Asia. However other Neanderthals may prove to have other y-dna. We know that most Europeans and Asians retain evidence in their dna of some Neanderthal ancestry. It would seem that the Neanderthal mt-dna on the direct female line is extinct unless a new discovery is made in some remote area. However the European Neanderthal y-dna is to be mostly found in E y-dna haplogroup which is spread even today throughout Europe. However through interbreeding with new arrivals the present E y-dna has only traces of Neanderthal. 

It would seem that women of W, X and I mt-dna may have been the first Shemite women (what Scientists call cro-magnon or modern) that mated with the Neanderthal men as these women also have some mutations in common with the Neanderthal women. It would seem that the daughters of this cross pollination received some of their fathers maternal mt-dna. It is now believed that Neanderthals can have red, blonde or brown hair and brown or fair eyes both blue and green. In fact the first daughters of Adan had red hair with yellow-red (bronze) skin like Adam and Eve and the first humans.

 Both black and white skin are a result of certain mutations that may have occurred naturally or been genetically manipulated before the Flood of Noah. In a recent study of Africans and colour pigmentation by the University of Pennsylvania they discovered the gene mutation for black skin. It is interesting that the black skin colour originally came from Nahal the wife of Ham. However some of her black sons or grandsons intermarried with Shemite wives who then settled in Africa and thus African people do not have any residual Neanderthal or Denisovan ancestry. However some of Nahal's black female descendants intermarried with Shemite men who moved into Asia and we find some Denisovan ancestry due to gene flow among the black peoples of Oceania and Australia and also some recent research claims Denisovan ancestry can also found among the Han Chinese, Japanese and Dai peoples as well as Native Americans.

Wednesday, June 6, 2018

Gravettian, Solutean, Aurignacian and Atlantic Bronze Age Cultures and U mt-dna


Scholars have invented an outline of the supposed history of mankind based on the evidence of archeology and paleontology. However the dating and identification of these remains are very speculative and suspect. To use technology remains as a dating methodology is fraught with problems. A stone age culture could be followed by an iron age culture and then by a stone culture again. A stone age culture and a bronze Age culture could exist at the same time in different settlements of culturally different tribes and peoples.

For example scholars date the so-called Gravettian culture to 22 -34 thousand years ago. This is dated before the Ice Age. In fact the Gravettian culture found centred in Spain and France was around 3,000 year ago in the days of Kings Saul and David in Israel. . Instead of lasting for 12 thousand years it was more likely about 200 years and was succeeded by the so-called Solutean culture in the days of King Solomon. The so-called Aurignacian culture overlapped the Grevettian and represented an earlier move of people from the Levant after the end of the Ice Age (around 1350 BC). After 1350 BC the tribes living in the northern parts of the Levant moved into Europe and Siberia. It was in the period between the Flood (around 2400 BC) and the Ice Age that the Neanderthal's dwelt in Europe who were descendants of Japheth's wife Adan.

U mt-dna descends from a Princess of Kush who married a Tharshish (Atlantean) King  in the 10th century BC. Her daughter Eglah was a wife of King David of Israel. The Aurignacian flint industry found in Ksar Akil (north east of Beirut) may have belonged to her family. Her descendants have spread across the earth with the movements of the tribes of Israel. These women are the daughters of the bear (Ursa/ Dova).

In fact Paleolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic tribes lived at the same time in Europe as well as that of those who are Bronze and Iron Age in technology. A culture that archeologists today call stone age may have had bronze and iron but the culture is so old that they have returned to dust. Also cultures we now say are bronze may have also had iron which after a couple of thousands years would have disappeared from the ruins. If they went under salt water then the decay or rust rate would be greatly sped up.

Before the Ice Age Europe was the domain of mainly the descendants of Japheth and Ham (especially in the south) and after the Ice Age it was settled by different tribes of Shemites belonging to F, G, H and C y-dna groups after 1350 BC who were either hunters and gatherers or farmers. Then the I, IJ, R1b and R1a y-dna from Abraham's sons Ishmael and Isaac which have been linked to the warrior Bronze and Iron Age settlements of Europe (including Yamna and Corded Ware cultures). 


 The tall blonde warriors of Zebulon of the Clan of Helon or Eglon are remembered as fairies or elves in later legends as well as Tarshishim (tall blonde angels) in Judaism

Other tribes that were in Europe in those days were those of the so-called Magdalenian and Azilian cultures. In fact it was the R1b M269 branch of the western Zebulonites that were the overlords of Western Europe and the I y-dna branch of the Maasites of Ishamel that were the overlords of northern Europe. This culture is known as the Atlantic Bronze Age (Atlantean). They entered Europe around the same time as the Aurignacians. The Aurignacians settled or wandered in the inland areas of Spain and France and other places in central and eastern Europe. More testing of ancient dna should help to clarify the origins of these different tribal groupings and who produced these cultures.

During the cataclysmic events around 600- 500 BC most of those who were R1b M269 y-dna whether in Judah or in the Israelites in the Yamna cultural area or on the Zebulonite Western coastlands of Europe received the L23 y-dna group marker. This would seem to have occurred after a large portion of Jews (Judahites and Levites) were taken by the Assyrians to a location (possibly to Armenia) where they received the PF7562 y-dna marker and thus began a new haplogroup clade. 

Later around 500 BC the Zebulonites who were penetrating America from their bases in the Atlantic Ocean received their U106 y-dna marker which distinguished them from the other L11/P310 y-dna Israelite brothers who were in Europe and a group of eastern Issacharites (Suebi) who were further east at this time who received their DF100 y-dna marker. The rest of the lost Israelites in Europe received the P312 y-dna marker at this time or soon after. The last group mutations occurred around 400 BC where the Milesians of the House of Nathan received their L21 y-dna in Egypt or Africa, the Simeonites their DF27 marker and the Reubenites their U152 marker in Spain and France. At this time the western Issacharites (Saxons) recieved their DF19 marker in Germany and some lost Levites in Germany also recieved their ZZ337 y-dna marker.

The Tribe of Zebulon had three clans- that of the Helonites, the Seredites and Yahleelites. R1b U106 y-dna is a marker of the Helonites, R1b L238 is a marker of the Seredites and R1b DF99 is a marker of the Yahleelites. The Seredites and Yahleelites remained in Israel when the Helonites sailed to the West. They would enter Europe with many of the other Israelites through Turkey or the Russian Steppes. The prophet Jonah and his descendants St Peter and St Andrew were Helonites. The Seredites went north through the Russian Steppes into northern Europe and the Yahleelites went via Turkey (Asia Minor) into Germany and Jutland where they were known as the Chali. They later became known as the Jutes and invaded Britian with the Angles and Saxons. There was an attempt at genocide against the Jutes and today DF99 y-dna are the survivors of that attempt by the West Saxons.

Another interesting development is the claim by some genetic researchers that the original home of R1b is in Europe as the oldest R1b found in Europe is a teenage boy in Northern Italy at the site known as Villabruna. He belongs to R1b1a (L754) y-dna haplogroup. This haplogroup originated before the Ice Age in Egypt and was the marker of the enslaved R1b Israelites who belong to the Leahite tribes. This boy belonged to a group of Israelites descended from a slave who left or escaped Egypt before the Exodus and moved north into Europe. The Villabuna site is considered to be Epigravettian which is an extension of the Gravettian culture and existed at the same time as the Solutean culture according to some scholars. Instead of his skeleton being 14,000 years old it is more likely around 3,000 years old. It would seem that this branch of R1b L754 has now become extinct. It is unlikely that any ancient remains can be tested for y-dna that is older than 4,000 years old.


Migration of R1b y-dna from their homeland in the Levant (Israel, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq) of the sons of the Patriarch Jacob and his wife the Matriarch Leah

Tuesday, May 29, 2018

Sweeping Gene Survey Challenges Darwinian Evolution


Today an interesting article appeared in the science section of news.com.au with its headline asking the question "Why did the overwhelming majority of species in existence today emerge at about the same time?" The article discusses a recent sweeping gene survey by Mark Stoeckle from The Rockefeller University in New York and David Thaler at the University of Basel in Switzerland.

The article states: "Extensive analysis of DNA barcodes across 100,000 species revealed a telltale sign showing that almost all animals on Earth emerged about the same time as humans...And who would have thought to trawl through five million of these gene snapshots — called “DNA barcodes” — collected from 100,000 animal species by hundreds of researchers around the world and deposited in the US government-run GenBank database?..."

The article then says that it is...  "sure to jostle, if not overturn, more than one settled idea about how evolution unfolds.
It is textbook biology, for example, that species with large, far-flung populations — think ants, rats, humans — will become more genetically diverse over time.
But is that true?
“The answer is no,” said Stoeckle, lead author of the study, published in the journal Human Evolution.
For the planet’s 7.6 billion people, 500 million house sparrows, or 100,000 sandpipers, genetic diversity “is about the same,” he told AFP.
The study’s most startling result, perhaps, is that nine out of 10 species on Earth today, including humans, came into being 100,000 to 200,000 years ago..." Of course those of us who hold to a more Biblical and germ-line understanding of genetics would see this time period as 4-6 thousand years ago.

It also states: "...In analysing the barcodes across 100,000 species, the researchers found a telltale sign showing that almost all the animals emerged about the same time as humans...Which brings us back to our question: why did the overwhelming majority of species in existence today emerge at about the same time?...“The simplest interpretation is that life is always evolving,” said Stoeckle. “It is more likely that — at all times in evolution — the animals alive at that point arose relatively recently.” In this view, a species only lasts a certain amount of time before it either evolves into something new or goes extinct...". Could the reason that humans and 90 percent of animals today emerged at the same time be because they all hopped out of the Ark about 4,400 years ago as the Bible said all along?



However the article concludes with a statement that seems to support those creationists who have all along said that there is a certain amount of micro-evolution or natural selection but within defined limits. This study now confirms that. "...And yet — another unexpected finding from the study — species have very clear genetic boundaries, and there’s nothing much in between.
“If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies,” said Thaler. “They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space.” The absence of “in-between” species is something that also perplexed Darwin, he said."


 



Friday, March 16, 2018

Calalus Artifacts and King Benjamin


Among the the artifacts found in Tucson Arizona known as the Calalus Artifacts is found an inscription in which it describes a great leader called King Benjamin who is both a Gaul and from Seine. The Latin text has been translated as: 

Benjamin was king of the people. They came from Seine to Rome. The bravest of the Gauls. He came to the assistance of the people to lay the foundation of the city. He built a wall around the city to resist the enemy. Benjamin mighty in strength he filled the multitude with religion. He was slain by the Thebans. I heard this from my father five hundred years after, behind the mountain. In memory of his father.

Some researchers have read this as a Jewish king called Benjamin that came from the Seine River in France to Rome to build the Aurelian Wall in the 3rd century AD. In fact this legend is set not 500 years before the time of OL but more like 1400-1500 before OL and in the early 4th century BC. Certain speculations have been made of the meaning of OL but there is a Welsh name Ol who was the son of Olwydd (meaning Track son of Tracker) in the Arthurian literature. Could it be a pun that he refers to himself as the one that will "track" the history of his people.

This Benjamin was also known as Brennius or Brennus who attacked Rome in 390 BC and the Wall was not the Aurelian Wall but possiby the Servian Wall. However it is not clear if the text is referring to the walls of Rome or Rhoda. Benjamin or Brennius was the war leader of the Gauls and King of the Senones (the Seine of the artifact).

The Senones are descendants of the Tribe of Simeon and belong to R1b DF27 y-dna. Among the settlers of Calalus there are many descendants of the Senones Tribe as is probably OL (the scribe of the Calalus artifacts) and his father. This Benjamin or Brennius should not be confused with the later Milesian leader Breoghan or Brennius who led the combined Gaelic and Celtic forces against the Greeks in the Balkans in 280 BC.

It is also very likely that the Roman writers and the legends based on their accounts confused the events of the attack of Brennius on Rome with his conquering of Calalus from the Olmecs in the sources they drew on for their histories. They have mistakenly identified Clusium in Italy with Calalus in America. 

Thus it would seem that the Jewish King Benjamin of the Senones was the leader of the Jewish Simeonites that moved to Gaul after the destruction of the Jewish Temple and then united the Gauls and attacked Rome and rebuilt its walls. Then with a combined army of Senones, other Gauls and Romans they sailed to America and Calalus and conquered the city of Rhoda. It was at this time they first encountered the ancestors of the Frisians, Angles and Chauci of R1b U106 Z381 y-dna descended from the Tribe of Zebulon . It may have been this force under the leadership of Benjamin that freed them from Olmec overlordship. 

In the past I had thought that the Roman connection with Calalus had occurred around 100 BC under the Roman Jewish leader Silvanus (Solomon), now I think it may be that Silvanus came to reinforce the already existing but embattled Senones-Roman colony. Thus the first Roman contact occurred in the 4th century BC around 380 BC. The Roman accounts of the attack of the Senones on Clusium need a new and revised reading. It would seem that the Calalusians were led by a man called Aruns or Aaron who would be the possible leader of the oppressed Zebulonites (Zapotecas). The Olmec or Toltec King or Governor of Calalus (the Ku) was called Lucumo by the Romans. Were these Olmec/Toltecs connected to the Etruscans? We do know they both practiced the cult of human sacrifice.

Could the walls that Benjamin built or rebuilt be the limestone city and walls of Rhoda in Calalus rather than Rome? Was the enemy the Olmecs or Toltecs? Was it the Olmecs or Toltecs that were the Thebans that killed Benjamin? Some scholars think that the whole story of Clusium was fiction as it didn't fit the events in Italy at that time. However this is because it was in fact about the events occurring in far away Calalus.

Synklar Diamond Lords of Calalus and the Location of the Ruins of Rhoda

Tuesday, March 13, 2018

Climate Change and Dna Mutation Rate






Some people have wondered how I came to my dating and conclusions about the age of dna haplogroups. I have mentioned that I do not believe there is a constant rate of mutations over recorded history. The problem with many algorithms used to date haplogroups is they take either an evolutionary molecular clock method or one based on the present germ-line rate of mutations. Neither methodolgies are correct but the germ-line approach is closer to the truth than the evolutionary molecular clock approach.

I have mentioned in my writings that drastic climate change whether caused naturally or artificially increases the rate of mutations as well as the effects of radiation. I have stated that during the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age the mutation rate became more rapid. It would seem that my conclusions were confirmed by a scientific study published in 2015 that climate change increased the mutation rate in a study by John H. Wilson with the Department of Molecular and Human Genetics at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston in Texas.  Paul Hamaker reported that: 


 "...Wilson and colleagues found that extremes of heat, extremes of cold, oxygen deprivation, and oxidative stress all produce higher rates of mutation in the regions of human DNA that are most prone to mutation. Climate stresses have a unique pathway to produce mutations that involve the stimulation of DNA rereplication. The researchers found that limiting the availability of replication origin-licensing factor CDT1 reduced the rate of mutation...."

They also concluded that these changes in the rate of mutations may affect the process of natural selection in both positive and negative ways. However  I think that as mutations always involve some loss of information this in the long run may limit the adaptability of those groups who had those mutations.

I have also proposed that in the past before 400 BC there would seem to be group mutations caused by cataclysmic events in the world's past. Instead of just one person mutating, the events caused all those of the same haplogroup living in the same environment to mutate in the same manner. Thus instead of assuming that a certain single chief passed on the mutation, the chief and his whole tribe mutated in the same manner and passed on the mutation. Of course those who share the same mutation would eventually be able to trace back to a common ancestor even though that ancestor may not have had that mutation and nor did his descendants for many generations before it occurred across his numerous descendants in one locale who passed it to their descendants while his descendants in a different locale may not have mutated or may have mutated differently.

I have also previously stated that y-dna can be influenced by the mother and her inherited dna in some cases. It is also possible that mt-dna may be influenced by the father's inherited dna. Thus it is possible that a child may inherit a mt-dna mutation from their father's mother or a y-dna mutation from their mother's father.

I also have mentioned how dna is often not available or so degraded that it is unable to be tested in bones before about 1960 BC due to the hot humid weather experienced after the Flood. Thus it will be difficult to ever understand the periods before 1960 BC through the testing of pre-1960 BC ancient dna. However we can exam the earlier in history of dna by the testing of bones after this period and by living dna. The erroneous evolutionary dating of ancient artifacts and the erroneous chronologies of ancient history especially of Egypt makes this process more difficult.

Other scientific studies have demonstrated that even a mildly stressful environment will increase the mutation rate as do levels of fitness. It has also been demonstrated that the mutation rate is also more rapid in in-breeding populations than out-breeding populations. Thus there are many diverse factors to take into account when using and interpreting the actual dna evidence. Of course one's world view can also affect one's interpretation. Those who have blind faith in evolutionary theories try to fit the evidence to their assumptions as do those who accept a so-called Creationist world view. Another factor to take into account is the possibility that man himself has caused certain mutations through genetic engineering in the past when civilisation may have been even more advanced than today.

My own approach includes evidence from dna results and studies, genealogical and archeological and historical evidence which for me seems to confirm a much younger age for man. However in the area of science I try to be open to the understandings and theories of others as well as open to the possibility (God forbid!) that I may be mistaken or wrong. I probably wasn't very diplomatic but certainly sanguine when I told my high School biology teacher; "Miss, looking at you I can see that your ancestors may have been apes but mine were obviously Divine Creations"!!!