from Expak Website

recovered trough WayBackMachine Website

Spanish version

 

 

 

 

The Roots of Mankind

The evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin may be disputed by some, but his basic conclusions are 'strongly supported' by 'modern scientific studies.'

 

It is well known, for example, that the chromosomes of the man-apes (chimpanzees, gorillas, etc.) are very similar to those of man himself, differing in fact only very slightly, and thus suggesting a genetic relationship.

 

(As a source, you may want to read Dorothy A. Miller, Science magazine, Vol. 198, p. 1116.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

The study of (human) blood is called hematology.

 

Equally as interesting as chromosomes is an examination of blood types, the so-called ABO alleles and the MN alleles.

 

Most of us, for example, know our blood type in the ABO system, i.e. A-positive, A-negative, B-positive, B-negative, O-positive, O-negative, AB-positive, AB-negative. (The positive or negative refer to the so-called Rhesus factor).

 

Persons with blood type O are so-called universal donors, since they can give blood to anyone having any of the blood types A, B, O or AB. Persons with blood type AB on the other hand, can give blood only to persons with AB blood type. A person with blood type A can not give blood to a person with blood type B and vice versa.

 

This means that a Kenyan with blood type A can give blood to a Norwegian with blood type A, but a Norwegian close relative with blood type B can not.
 

 


ABO Origins

 

Given the above facts, blood types AB and O seem to be some form of combination of A+A, A+B or B+B (AB as exclusive and O as inclusive) - whereas A and B themselves appear to be separate original groups.

 

Only if the father and mother are A and B or B and A blood type can the child have any of the human blood groups A, B, AB or O.

 

This negates current theory that O is the original blood type, especially since the man-apes have little or no O blood type and no AB blood type. A and B are very likely the originals.
 

 


The Man-Apes

  • 28 separate studies showed that Chimpanzees have the blood types A and minimal O, but never B.

  • 8 separate studies showed that Gorillas have the blood types B and minimal O, but never A.

  • There is NO blood type AB in either of the man-apes!

    (Jakob Schmitt, Immunbiologische Untersuchungen bei Primaten; S. Karger, New York and Basel, 1968).

But man has both A and B AND blood type AB as well as very much O.

 

The same holds true for the MN blood type, which is a different blood antigen. Man is both M and N or the combined MN blood type whereas the Chimpanzees and Gorillas react exclusively to these types. (According to Schmitt, the reactions of Chimpanzees are 00.16 to Anti-M human mucous and 10.00 to Anti-N, whereas the figures for Gorillas are exactly the reverse, with 10.00 to Anti-M and 00.64 to Anti-N).


Hence, M and N must have combined.

Charles Darwin (see The Origin of Species) wrote that it,

"was probable that Africa was inhabited by extinct apes closely allied to the gorilla and the chimpanzee; and as these two species are man's nearest allies, it is somewhat more probable that our early progenitors lived on the African continent."

Moreover, as noted by Philip Van Doren Stern, Prehistoric Europe (W.W. Norton & Co., N.Y., 1969, p. 28):

"it is interesting to note that the australophithecines (precursors of man) lived east and south of the area now inhabited by gorillas and chimpanzees."

A + B = You and Me?

 

Accordingly, I suspect here that we might guess as to who Adam and Eve were, i.e. perhaps man developed on two separate lines from the man-apes or evolved from a combination of these two separate lines somewhere down the road.

 

Did you make the same connection?

 

 



A + B = You and Me

There is good evidence in world blood distribution for two separate groups in human evolution, represented perhaps by Cro-Magnon Man on the one side and Neanderthal Man on the other side.

As noted by Lars Beckman (A Contribution to the Physical Anthropology and Population Genetics of Sweden: Lund, 1959, p. 21):

"The Early European race is characterized by a high per cent of Rh-negatives, a very low B-frequency and a relatively high A2 frequency... probably some connection with postglacial Cro-Magnon Man....

 

The Asiatic race is characterized by a high frequency of A1 and B and a low frequency of Rh-negatives..." (i.e. perhaps some connection to Neanderthal man).

 

Note: As noted by Herberdt Wendt, (In Search of Adam, Houghton-Mifflin: Boston, 1956) in spite of the historically unfounded and falsely bad reputation of Neanderthal Man, his cranial capacity "was amazingly large, 1300-1650 cc. in comparison with a range of 1100-1700 for modern European males."
 

 


The right-handers and the left-handers

 

Handedness is another point of evidence for two separate groups of Man.

 

Suffice it here to say that Homo erectus, a precursor to man - never found in Europe - was right-handed, as were the Neanderthals. The ancient Cro-Magnon cave painters of Europe were almost certainly left-handed. (See Philip Van Doren Stern, Prehistoric Europe.)

 

Given this, our view of left-handers, especially in continental Europe, is superstition.
 

 


Giants and Dwarfs

 

In terms of the size of our predecessors, there is also evidence of two groups of human beings in ancient times.

 

As J. Bronowski wrote in his wonderful book, The Ascent of Man (Little, Brown & Co.: Boston, 1973, p. 38),

"A cousin of man" allegedly "not in the direct line to us, is a heavily-built Australopithecus robustus who is a vegetarian.... His cousin on the line to man is lighter - visibly so in the jaw - and is probably a meat-eater...a small creature standing only four feet high." (Australopithecus africanus)

Herberdt Wendt in his book In Search of Adam (1956. notes 17, p. 362, p. 487) writes in this regard:

"It appeared that in the latest glacial period at least two culturally creative races had lived in Europe... Giants and dwarfs.... They seem to have lived at the same time and in the same places. Which one of them was the real Adam?"

In terms of culture, Philip Van Doren Stern in Prehistoric Europe (1969) writes that,

"There is also an excellent possibility that early Europe was populated at times not only by hand-axe makers but also by a different and more primitive people, the chopper-chopping-tool makers who used chipped pebbles and accidentally produced flakes rather than carefully shaped flint."

Another researcher writes that the cultural record of the Pleistocene is said in fact to show "two cultural traditions", Jacquette Hawkes in Prehistoric Europe (Volume I of UNESCO's History of Mankind: London, 1963).

 

She states further,

"while later on contacts between the flake-tool and hand-axe makers in Eurasia undoubtedly led to the mingling and transference of cultural traits, there is good reason to believe that at this stage (prior to Neanderthal man) the two people were distinct...."

All of these findings support the speculation of H.V. Vallois that there may indeed have been a "second line" of the evolution of humanity (cited by Wendt, In Search of Adam, p. 362, n. 17).

 

Wendt himself writes that,

"It seemed as though there had been very strange happenings in the general evolution of humanity before the rise, some 150,000 years ago, of the two clearly distinguishable forms of the typical Neanderthal specimen and the Homo sapiens of the Ice Age. In Palestine... near Nazareth... 18 primitive human remains were unearthed...

 

They resembled Neanderthal man, but on the one hand their skulls were much more primitive and on the other their limbs were far more modern. A female... was only four feet nine inches long, while a male... was a foot taller. In addition to skulls of Neanderthal type others were found with high foreheads, well rounded occiputs, and pronounced chins."

Spectacular finds of giant-like human skulls were found in Java, leading Franz Weidenreich to publish a theory that a prehistoric race of giants once existed... and that these giants seemed to represent a transitional stage from gorilla to man (Report of May 9, 1944 to the American Ethnological Society: Apes, Giants and Man, Chicago: 1946).

Wendt concludes in In Search of Adam:

"Did early humanity, under the influence of the weather of this fateful epoch, divide into two groups ...?"

 

 

 

The World Distribution of Human ABO Blood Types by Peoples
 

 

 

The charts are based on the figures of L. Beckman

'A Contribution to the Physical Anthropology and Population Genetics of Sweden'

Lund, Sweden, 1959

 



 

 

 

 

World Populations and Blood Groups

The study of the antiquity of mankind - that is, YOUR history and mine, is increasingly an interdisciplinary science. The results of one branch of research must bear up to the burden of proof required by the results derived from another branch of study.

For example, whatever the results of linguistic and archaeological research may be, they will be increasingly scrutinized by other branches of science which do not deal in (what is often only) academic opinions, but in irrefutable facts. One such group of facts which relates to the origins and dispersal of mankind and its languages throughout this planet - is blood data.

 

Theories about ancient cultures and discussion about the migrations of ancient peoples will increasingly have to conform to blood data provided by the physical sciences. We, who live in this world of DNA know that our TRUE history is etched indelibly in our genes - and in this technological age, we are increasingly in a position to read our past simply in our bodily chemistry. Or to put it in other words, we carry the answers to age-old questions about the origins of man WITHIN us.

 

The so-called "gene pool" is reconstructable far back into the past.

Hence, I provide here a graphic which presents unavoidable FACTS. They are not the opinions of well-meaning scholars nor are they subject to challenge or change. They simply exist.

 

Hence, theories about ancient cultures and languages which do not conform to these facts CAN NOT be true, and only those which DO conform to these facts CAN be true, although agreement does not guarantee that they ARE true.

 

 

 

 

Did you try your hand at getting the right solution? How do your numbers read from top to bottom? The odds against you getting them all right are astronomical - unless you are a specialist in the field of blood groups.


The correct solution is, running from top to bottom in the box above: 10-1-11-3-9-6-8-2-5-4-7


There were some surprises, weren't there?


The worst scores were probably obtained by linguists and archaeologists - whose pervading theories simply DO NOT match up with the evidence of the physical sciences. The reason for this is clear. Archaeology forms its theories based on what they dig up and this is a fairly serendipity undertaking, which relies much on chance.

 

Linguistics, up to now, is still in its baby shoes, and many of the so-called "rules" which have developed will one day be put to test in computers - using the hypotheses derived - and I for one, doubt whether many of them will work - at least not in the historical sense.

 

New directions in e.g. Nostratic support this view.

The dendrite used here is a mathematical method of bringing ALL interrelationships on one contiguous branched line. It shows how far each group of people is from other (i.e. the length of the lines is also mathematically calculated and significant). Dotted lines mean the relationship is clear, but that the exact distance is, as yet, mathematically uncertain.

Here is how the dendrite graph looks like complete:

 

 

 

 

The completed dendrite tells us clearly how man developed and how he scattered throughout the Earth, starting in Africa, moving northward and then branching to the East and West.

 

Indeed this conforms with topographical data since the Alps and the mountains of Asia presented insurmountable obstacles in ancient times. I.e. the direction of dispersal ran basically across the old Amber Trail, across the flatlands from the Black Sea to the Baltic and from thence in all directions.

 

This also conforms to the fact that the Baltic languages are the oldest Indo-European tongues - and, since BALT in Latvian means "white" (the old BALT inscriptions in Phoenician are incorrectly transcribed BA'AL), we see here the basic line between the whiter-skinned paled-out races of the north and their darker-skinned neighbors to the south.


The axis lies on the trail from Africa to the BLACK sea and from there to the BALTIC ("sea of the whites"). The Arabs, as shown by the blood data, must then be a mixture of white and African tribes - (as perhaps recounted in the Bible - i.e. Abraham and his 2nd wife.)

Oriental scholars and Egyptologists will eventually have to take these distributions of blood groups into account, especially since the blood groupings of Egyptians and Hebrews simply defy all current academic theories about the origins of the Pharaohs and the Hebrews, so also in linguistics, archaeology, religion and ethnology.

 

Nothing could be more clear from this data, than that the Hebrews and Egyptians have a nearly common blood origin and that their geographic origin lies in the broad expanses of northern Euroasia, among a people linguistically close and related by blood to the Latvians and the neighboring peoples and dialects.

 

Or, as stated so often, the key might be found in the Kurgan connection, including Sanskrit, Tocharian, etc.