O type blood Jesus and the Annunaki

[Bokonontheancient]

WOWA! That was farfetched crystal sage. No extra terrestrials came here earlier or whatnot.. there is no evidence at all supporting that. I think like I said the different levels of strata were altered by humans and or/ nature. But crazy ideas .

[Harte]

That man can be shown to have lived in the mid-Tertiary period, and in a geological age when there did not yet exist one single specimen of the now known species of mammals, is a statement that science cannot deny and which has now been proven by de Quatrefages. (S.D. II, 155).

Science can[ and absolutelydoes deny this. No Tertiary existance of even a hominid has ever been proven, or even supported in any way with evidence, by anyone, whatever Blavatsky wanted her marks to believe.

Maybe these 'shrew like' placental mammals were the favourite houshold pets..brought to earth by Eric von Danikan's 'Space People'....

Here's a site that summarizes the (fairly) recent mammal fossil finds, most, if not all, of which are older than Blavatsky ever thought - wonder why her "mahatmas" didn't tell her about these?

Early Mammals

There's links to the announcements of some of those finds with more info, if anyone's interested.

If you read the info at that link, you'll find early mammals the size of buffalos, a beaver-like animal that actually predates most dinosaurs and a largish mammal that actually ate a small dinosaur (fossil dino bones found inside the mammal's fossil skeleton.)

Hardly the small "shrew-like" animals you seem to think they were.

Harte

[crystal sage]

"What is nearly '200 million years old', furry, weighed less than a paper clip and scurried beneath the feet of dinosaurs? A team of fossil-finders, led by researchers at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Museum of Natural History, suggest the answer may include one of your relatives - a distant cousin of modern mammals.

Classified as a new species, the newly discovered miniature mammal is the closest known relative to living mammals. It displays crucial mammalian features - a large brain and detached ear bones - yet it is forty million years older than any mammalian fossil previously found."

Yes!!!! You're right!!!

Scientists say the animal's last meal probably is the first proof that mammals hunted small dinosaurs some 130 million years ago. It contradicts conventional evolutionary theory that early mammals were timid, chipmunk-sized creatures that scurried in the looming shadow of the giant reptiles.

The dinosaur-eater belongs to a species called Repenomamus robustus, known previously from skull fragments.

This squat, toothy specimen is more complete; lying on its side, it measures a little less than 2 feet long, and probably weighed about 15 pounds.

On R. robustus' left side and under the ribs in the location of its stomach are the fragmented remains of a very young Psittacosaurus.

This common, fast-moving plant-eater is known as the "parrot dinosaur" because it had a small head with a curved, horny beak. Its arms were much shorter than its legs. Adults grew to be 6 feet long, but the one that was devoured was just 5 inches.

The remains still are recognizable, indicating that R. robustus ripped its prey like a crocodile, but probably had not developed the ability to chew food like more advanced mammals.

"We can still see articulated limb bones," Meng said. "It must have swallowed food in large hunks without being chewed."

As for my off earth visitor..poacher.. miner theories...LOL this is the 'alternative history' site hmmmm?

And One can't dismiss those anomolies...like all the other scientists... etc...that ignore evidence that disagree with their theories of how things came to be....

It's like putting together a jigsaw puzzle...and ignoring all the left over pieces... and recutting or cutting off the jagged edges to make it look complete and saying this is how it is meant to be....you only get part of the picture...may have even lopped off the whole point of focus

....

History isn't complete or correct..untill all pieces fit....and all new pieces fit in...

comfortably....

Who benefits over half told tales...??? the religions that are created around them..???

Could we be totally missing out on some vital information...by ignoring all those pesky inconsistancies..that tell us that we haven't quite got the whole story....????

What is wrong with the idea of space visitors???

We are on our way to settle Mars...and maybe the Moon... etc...

Who's to say that we aren't the decendants of Space visitors that have chosen to stay on!!!

That these early space visitors were playing with cloning etc...to seed this planet to make it more like home...there are hints ..memories of it in ancient writings..in the bible...

Earth could have been visited...seeded..many times over a billion years or so....it can explain the sudden evolutions of new breeds of species....It's more believable than random evolutions... and what of the instinctive intolerant discarding of mutant offspring of various species... even with humans....Unless it were deliberate..I'm surprised so many survived..and grew to become recognisable species.....

Edited October 2, 2006 by crystal sage

[crystal sage]

The Rhesus system is named after the Rhesus monkey,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhesus_blood_group_system

Rhesus negative blood then has no monkey blood...

So The Basques are well-known to have distinctive body characteristics. Kurlansky says "Ample evidence exists that the Basques are a physically distinct group. There is a Basque type with a long straight nose, thick eyebrows, strong chin, and long earlobes" [1].

Basque skulls tend to be built on a different pattern. In the early 1880s, a researcher reported "Someone gave me a Basque body and I dissected it, and I assert that the head was not built like that of other men" [1].

These qualitative differences are indicative, but quantitative evidence, with presence or absence of features, or items being present in different numbers, has greater weight in deciding whether specimens belong to the same or different species. Powerful quantitative evidence comes from a consideration of blood factors.

Human blood is classified according to various parameters, the most important of which are ABO and Rhesus characteristics. In ABO, blood may contain the 'A' factor (giving A-group blood), the 'B' factor (B-group), both 'A' and 'B' (AB blood), or neither (O blood). The A and B factors act like antibodies, and if blood containing one or both of them is transferred to a person whose blood does not already contain them, adverse reactions occur. Group O blood contains neither antibody and can typically be transferred without reaction to any recipient.

Some 55% of Basques have Group O blood, one of the highest percentages in the world [3].

Even stronger evidence comes from the Rhesus factor, discovered only in 1940. The blood of most humans (and, apparently, all other primates [6]) contains this factor, and is called Rhesus-positive or Rh+ blood. Blood lacking this factor is called Rhesus-negative.

The Basques are well-known to have the highest percentage (around 33%) of Rhesus-negative blood of any human population [2], and so are regarded as the original source of this factor.

Possession of Rh-negative blood can be a major disadvantage for a human population. A Rh-negative woman who conceives a Rh-positive child with a Rh-positive man will typically bear her first child without special problems. However, because of intermingling of fluids between mother and foetus, the first pregnancy builds up antibodies to Rh+ blood in the woman which typically attack the blood of her subsequent Rh+ children, causing them to miscarry, be stillborn, or die shortly after birth (infant haemolytic disease [6]). This phenomenon is unknown elsewhere in nature, although it can occur with artificial crosses between species, as in mule production [6].

The scenario so far then is this. Around 600,000 years ago, in southern Europe, a species of man separated off from the ancestral line, and we call this species Homo neanderthalensis, the 'N-people'. The blood of this species contained none of the factors A, B, or Rh.

Much later, possibly around 200,000 years ago in Africa, the main human line had picked up the A, B, and Rh factors (possibly from other primates, the Rhesus factor is named after the Rhesus monkey or macaque), and by then could be classed as Homo sapiens, the 'S-people'.

http://www.aoi.com.au/bcw/neanderbasque.htm

[Harte]

The Rhesus system is named after the Rhesus monkey,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhesus_blood_group_system

Rhesus negative blood then has no monkey blood...

Having, or not having, "monkey blood" has nothing to do with it. If you read the info at your link you'll see that it was first discovered by immunizing rabbits with Rhesus red blood cells. This means that the rabbits could just have easily provided red blood cells for monkey immunization, in which case instead of "Rh factor," we would be today calling it "BR factor" (Bunny Rabbit.)

....The scenario so far then is this. Around 600,000 years ago, in southern Europe, a species of man separated off from the ancestral line, and we call this species Homo neanderthalensis, the 'N-people'. The blood of this species contained none of the factors A, B, or Rh.

Much later, possibly around 200,000 years ago in Africa, the main human line had picked up the A, B, and Rh factors (possibly from other primates, the Rhesus factor is named after the Rhesus monkey or macaque), and by then could be classed as Homo sapiens, the 'S-people'.

http://www.aoi.com.au/bcw/neanderbasque.htm

As far as I am aware, there is no information available about the blood type of Neandertal Man or whether said species had A, B types or Rh factors. This seems to be either an assumption or a fabrication, though maybe I'm wrong.

The author appears to be asserting that Basques have inherited some characteristics of Neadertal Man. This would be very interesting if it turned out to be true. However, there's just no reason to believe it as of yet. See, geographic isolation can accomplish precisely the same odd distribution of genetic characteristics as the author attributes to a (possible) Basque - Neandertal connection.

However, it's certainly possible, though the idea of hybridization between H. sapiens and H. neandertal suffered a serious blow a couple of years ago when mitochondrial DNA showed no maternal inheritance between the specimen from which it was extracted and the present day human race.

That still doesn't completely rule out the possibility, however, of paternal hybridization.

Harte

[Bokonontheancient]

"What is nearly '200 million years old', furry, weighed less than a paper clip and scurried beneath the feet of dinosaurs? A team of fossil-finders, led by researchers at Pittsburgh's Carnegie Museum of Natural History, suggest the answer may include one of your relatives - a distant cousin of modern mammals.

Classified as a new species, the newly discovered miniature mammal is the closest known relative to living mammals. It displays crucial mammalian features - a large brain and detached ear bones - yet it is forty million years older than any mammalian fossil previously found."

Yes!!!! You're right!!!

Scientists say the animal's last meal probably is the first proof that mammals hunted small dinosaurs some 130 million years ago. It contradicts conventional evolutionary theory that early mammals were timid, chipmunk-sized creatures that scurried in the looming shadow of the giant reptiles.

The dinosaur-eater belongs to a species called Repenomamus robustus, known previously from skull fragments.

This squat, toothy specimen is more complete; lying on its side, it measures a little less than 2 feet long, and probably weighed about 15 pounds.

On R. robustus' left side and under the ribs in the location of its stomach are the fragmented remains of a very young Psittacosaurus.

This common, fast-moving plant-eater is known as the "parrot dinosaur" because it had a small head with a curved, horny beak. Its arms were much shorter than its legs. Adults grew to be 6 feet long, but the one that was devoured was just 5 inches.

The remains still are recognizable, indicating that R. robustus ripped its prey like a crocodile, but probably had not developed the ability to chew food like more advanced mammals.

"We can still see articulated limb bones," Meng said. "It must have swallowed food in large hunks without being chewed."

As for my off earth visitor..poacher.. miner theories...LOL this is the 'alternative history' site hmmmm?

And One can't dismiss those anomolies...like all the other scientists... etc...that ignore evidence that disagree with their theories of how things came to be....

It's like putting together a jigsaw puzzle...and ignoring all the left over pieces... and recutting or cutting off the jagged edges to make it look complete and saying this is how it is meant to be....you only get part of the picture...may have even lopped off the whole point of focus

....

History isn't complete or correct..untill all pieces fit....and all new pieces fit in...

comfortably....

Who benefits over half told tales...??? the religions that are created around them..???

Could we be totally missing out on some vital information...by ignoring all those pesky inconsistancies..that tell us that we haven't quite got the whole story....????

What is wrong with the idea of space visitors???

We are on our way to settle Mars...and maybe the Moon... etc...

Who's to say that we aren't the decendants of Space visitors that have chosen to stay on!!!

That these early space visitors were playing with cloning etc...to seed this planet to make it more like home...there are hints ..memories of it in ancient writings..in the bible...

Earth could have been visited...seeded..many times over a billion years or so....it can explain the sudden evolutions of new breeds of species....It's more believable than random evolutions... and what of the instinctive intolerant discarding of mutant offspring of various species... even with humans....Unless it were deliberate..I'm surprised so many survived..and grew to become recognisable species.....

Evolution is neither sudden nor random. Evolution is the gradual change of species due to natural selection, mutations, and gentetic drift in gene pools over time. Although evolution can occur suddenly following a period of mass extinction, this is to be expected because there is more space and resources available for the surviving species to adapt. Crystal Sage, I suggest you take a look at Darwin's Theory of Evolution more in depth and some keys will start turning in your head.

- Bokonon

[sons of northern darkness]

wait a minute i thought jesus was concived supernaturally, how do we know he had blood in him at all?

[zandore]

As far as I am aware, there is no information available about the blood type of Neandertal Man or whether said species had A, B types or Rh factors. This seems to be either an assumption or a fabrication, though maybe I'm wrong.

Hey Harte

It appears we might soon find out: Scientists try to extract Neanderthal DNA

[crystal sage]

Hey Harte

It appears we might soon find out: Scientists try to extract Neanderthal DNA

http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/dna.nean.html

Three hypotheses about the nature of the genetic relationship between Neandertals and modern humans have been offered. At one extreme is a replacement hypothesis, proposing that the Neandertals were a fundamentally different type of human (perhaps even a different species) that represent an evolutionary dead-end, with no genetic contributions to present-day humans. At the other extreme is a linear evolution hypothesis that modern humans in Europe evolved directly from Neandertals, providing major genetic contributions to present-day humans. In an intermediate model, it is

possible that Neandertals made limited genetic contributions of some genes to modern humans.

Nuclear genes occur in two copies per cell. The combination of their low abundance and the aforementioned technical problems make it highly unlikely that nuclear DNA sequences will be amenable to analysis in ancient samples. Scientists have concentrated instead on the use of mitochondrial DNA (mt DNA). The mitochondrial genome is present in hundreds to thousands of copies in each cell, providing an important technical advantage. The control region of the mitochondrial genome does not encode proteins, and contains hypervariable regions that are known to reveal differences between

populations of humans. MtDNA has an additional unique feature in that it traces maternal lines of inheritance only.

In what has been widely hailed as a milestone in genetic studies of early human history, Svante Paabo and his collaborators (Krings et al., 1997) successfully isolated and analyzed a segment of Neandertal DNA. They used PCR to amplify sequences from the control region in mitochondrial DNA from samples isolated from a piece of right humerus from the Neandertal type specimen. They obtained the Neandertal sequence of one of the hypervariable regions and compared it to the reference sequence for modern humans. The Neandertal sequence was closer to that of humans than to chimpanzees, although there were dramatic differences from modern humans. Within the

small region analyzed, there were 24 transition mutations, 2 transversion mutations, and one single nucleotide insertion when compared to modern humans. By comparison, modern humans differ, on average, by 8 substitutions in this same region; interestingly, the sites that vary between modern humans are not identical to those that vary between them and the Neandertal DNA. Krings et al. (1997) find that the Neandertal sequences lie outside of the variation present in modern humans, and suggest that Neandertals became extinct without contributing to the mtDNA pool present in extant human populations.

While acknowledging this research as a pioneering study in Neandertal scholarship, the scientific community (including the authors) raised the problems inherent in generalizing from a single sample. What if this individual were at an extreme in the genetic variation present in the Neandertal population? Could there be other, more prevalent, Neandertal

mtDNA types that would be represented in the mtDNA spectrum of modern man? The critical corroboration of Neandertal mtDNA sequences came shortly after the Krings' study with the publication of two additional Neandertal sequences: one from an individual from Mezmaiskaya Cave in Russia (Ovchinnikov et al., 2000) and the other from Vindija Cave in Croatia (Krings et al., 2000). The three Neandertal sequences form a clade distinct from modern humans. Knowledge of mtDNA types from three different individuals who are geographically and temporally isolated reinforces the fact that

Neandertals are genetically distinct from modern humans. It also strongly corroborates the interpretation that Neandertal mtDNA types are not present in extant human pools.

For the conclusion that Neandertals do not contribute to modern gene pools to be correct, it is necessary for the known human sequences to be an accurate representation of the event in question. The unique inheritance patterns and evolutionary pressures on mtDNA make it reasonable to question whether it accurately represents all possible genetic athways. Since we do not yet have (and may never get) other DNA sequences from ancient DNA, this is something of a moot objection. Assuming that mtDNA is the only option, it is important to note that the current human database includes over one thousand

individuals representing a variety of different populations. While there may be additional variants not yet discovered, it is unlikely that the current view of existing mtDNA types is fundamentally unrepresentative of existing humans.

"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3023685.stm

The DNA from the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons was taken from their bones.

. The DNA from the Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons was taken from their bones.

The genetic material was extracted from cell structures called mitochondria rather than the nucleus.

The scientists found that while, unsurprisingly, modern humans show clear genetic signs of their Cro-Magnon ancestry, no such link between Neanderthal DNA and modern European DNA could be established.

The results, they say, indicate that Neanderthals made little or no contribution to the genes of modern humans.

Out of Africa

The mitochondrial DNA of the two ancient species was very different, claims the study.

"This discontinuity is difficult to reconcile with the hypothesis that both Neanderthals and early anatomically modern humans contributed to the current European gene pool."

The finding are said to support the theory that the "anatomically modern human" arose in Africa some 150,000 years ago and then dispersed across the globe, displacing the Neanderthals on the way.

It is a blow to the so-called multi-regional theory, in which some interbreeding between Neanderthal and early humans is said to have taken place.

..............

http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro2.htm

Mungo Man from Lake Mungo, Australia does not match any living human DNA. Some suggest this does not support the 'out of Africa' theory. The aging of Mungo Man was previously dated to 56,000 to 68,000 B.C. The theory is that this group of individuals represented by "Mungo" combined with other groups arriving later to form the present Aborigines and Melanesians. Presumably settlement of the Australian continent would have occurred thousands of years before Mungo Man showed up.

Australian National University researchers published the results of mtDNA testing on Lake Mungo 3. The DNA did not match that of living humans. Either the Mungo lineage evolved in Australia, not Africa, or it could mean that the Mungo lineage went extinct.

Edited October 4, 2006 by crystal sage

[Ashley-Star*Child]

If you read the book of Jmmanuel it DOES talk of people from space (Heaven is in space to begin with) creating a bloodline that Jesus (Jmmanuel) was part of.

[zandore]

I really don't know why you posted those links.....

from them I found this

http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/dna.nean.html

While it remains to be seen whether the interactions between Neandertals and our ancestors were G, R, or X-rated, it is certain that the Neandertals and Cro-Magnons did not interact as portrayed in "B" movies. Neandertals were hardly the simple-minded, big and bumbling brutes who fell prey to the invading, intelligent and gracile Cro-Magnons. Both types of "humans" walked the earth together for thousands of years in and around Europe. Like many of the most interesting evolutionary questions, the issues surrounding the co-existence of Neandertal (and other ancient hominins) with our early ancestors will be investigated for years to come as new specimens and new approaches come to light. The final chapter in the relationship between Neandertal and modern man remains to be written..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3023685.stm

This has been fuelled by a skeleton uncovered in Portugal that appears to show both Neanderthal and human features.

http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro2.htm

Anthropologists analysis of ancient skulls from this time to modern times throughout the world write a different story. Modern man descended independently from common ancestors that lived on nearly every continent and mingled with earlier human types like Neanderthal. Distinctive Neanderthal markings are still evident in skulls of today, we are they. The disappearance of Neanderthal is the result of interbreeding. There was no evidence of a single wave of modern man out of Africa. It was more of a dribble going both ways. .........

60,000 B.C.

Nine Neanderthal like human remains are uncovered at Shamdar Cave near Rowanduz (Iraq). Evidence suggests they cared for the sick and disabled. Neanderthal man is also located at Bau de L'Aubesier, southern France. They appeared to hunt or trade in a forty-kilometer radius. This appears to be a deduction based upon animal characteristics. Homo Sapiens Neanderthal as a culture is not anatomically identical. The Shanider Neanderthal of Iraq is quite different anatomically from the Neanderthal of Italy as an example. The Neanderthal culture developed a belief of life after death and began the ritual burial practices that modern man adopted. This life after death or spiritual dimension spread throughout Europe and the Middle East Neanderthal culture. They also used red ocher powder in their burials. The burial sites also included the medical herb yarrow being the earliest record of it use. There appears to be a universal belief in a mysterious supernatural other world and a belief of a life after death. The idea of spirits is also universal and likely an attempt to explain their environment. The Egyptians believed they each had a personal guardian spirit called Ka (an astral being) as well as their own Ka. We still follow this ancient practice but call it a leap of faith. Some believe religion began when ritualized burial practice began. Others suggest that when scientists can't explain an artifact, they give it a religious purpose.

BTW: Why did you quote the "Mungo Man"?

A University of Melbourne-led study has finally got scientists to agree on the age of Mungo Man, Australia’s oldest human remains, and the consensus is he is 22,000 years younger.

Mungo Man’s new age is 40,000 years. The research also boosted the age of Mungo Lady, the world’s first recorded cremation, by 10,000 years putting her at the same age as Mungo Man. It is the first time scientists have reached a broad agreement on the ages of the Lake Mungo remains.

SOURCE

[crystal sage]

BTW: Why did you quote the "Mungo Man"?

A University of Melbourne-led study has finally got scientists to agree on the age of Mungo Man, Australia’s oldest human remains, and the consensus is he is 22,000 years younger.

Mungo Man’s new age is 40,000 years. The research also boosted the age of Mungo Lady, the world’s first recorded cremation, by 10,000 years putting her at the same age as Mungo Man. It is the first time scientists have reached a broad agreement on the ages of the Lake Mungo remains.

SOURCE

Mainly because it's DNA doesn'y link with the others....

//a new theory...Out of Australia...as apposed to out of Africa!!!!

January 12, 2001

The accepted wisdom in paleontology circles is that all existing humans owe their origins to a single 'Eve' who lived in Africa about 200,000 years ago. Her descendants, they contend, migrated from their home continent and spread throughout the world supplanting, but not interbreeding with, populations of earlier hominids such as homo erectus and Neanderthal Man. Studies of mitochondrial DNA (which is transmitted only from female parents) showed, they believed, that this theory was a proven fact.

However that has all now been thrown into question. A study was made of DNA extracted from a 60,000 year old Australian skeleton known as Mungo Man. What was found was that the mtDNA of Mungo was quite different to that of the hypothetical Eve. The finding was widely reported on January 9th in journals such as Science, BBC News and New Scientist.

The research was conducted by a team led by Dr Alan Thorne, of the Australian National University. The Mungo researchers contend that the DNA sequences isolated from Mungo Man's bones show him to have a genetic lineage that is both older and distinct from the African line. Given the undoubted modern appearance of Mungo Man, they argue, major doubt must now be cast on the so-called "Out of Africa" theory.

Other 'experts' who have based their reputations on the original theory are, not unnaturally, furious and are calling for more studies to be done. As evolutionary psychologists, we await the outcome with great interest.

Funnily enough I remember talking to the great Australian teller of Aboriginal Tales Bill Harney many years ago. According to him the Aborigines firmly believed that human beings originated in Australia. Could they be right after all? BM

http://www.upliftprogram.com/h_evolution_01.html#h5

[crystal sage]

wait a minute i thought jesus was concived supernaturally, how do we know he had blood in him at all?

38,000 B.C.

http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro2.htm

The people of Kakadu, Australia is rock-painting handprints and symbols.

Some believe red hair first appeared between 38,000 to 18,000 B.C. in Europe They speculate it may have originated among Neanderthal man as it does not occur in African cultures. Others suggest the supporting evidence is sparse to support this theory.

The Republic of Komi, on the banks of the River Usy, in the arctic circle is a site with a mammoth tusk with human markings. Other bones include deer, and horses, with one bone having an arrow-head stuck in it. Some speculate Europe was populated from the north rather than the south which is commonly believed.

Some believe the Basque culture originated about this time from Cro-Magnon man and completed their evolution as a distinct culture by 5,000 B.C. The Basque are genetically and blood type different than other Europeans. Most Basques have type 0 blood with a high incidence of RH negative. The Basque speak Euskara which is unique and not related to any other language of the world. The Basque called their country Nafarroa (Nauarre). The Basque appear to be the indigenous people of Europe.

***************

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/redhairedmummiesegyptbufo.html

http://encounters.conforums.com/index.cgi?...0748&start=

There is a hypothesis that Quetzalcoatl (Rh-Negative blood factor) was a viking, sole survivor of a sea exploration. Or a Celtic person from the Tribe of DANA.

The KEY is in the HEART of the CELL.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRACING TRIBE OF DANN THROUGH THE RH FACTOR

Blood Factor ( Rh+ or Rh-) and Morphogenetic Field Tuning.

* Your Rh status describes whether or not you have a protein on the surface of red blood cells. If you don't have the Rh factor, you're considered Rh-negative; if you have it, you're Rh-positive. About 85 percent of people are Rh-positive, though it varies by race. For African Americans, about 90-95 percent are Rh-positive, and for Asians, the figure is 98 to 99 percent. Hmmmm

Rh-Negatives are RARE.

But, strangely.... a person with type O negative blood is considered to be a "Universal Donor". It means his or her blood can be given to anyone, regardless of blood type, without causing a transfusion reaction.

The Rh-Negatives Factor is considered a "Mutation" of "Unknown Origin", which happened in Europe, about 25,000-35,000 years ago. Then this group spread heavily into the area of what is now Spain, England, Ireland, etc.

The researches of R. Frank, a scholar at the University of Iowa, suggest that the Basques were far-advanced in navigational skills and other aspects of technology long before the rise of the Roman Empire. The Basques, she believes, are the last remnants of the megalith builders, who left behind dolmens, standing stones, and other rock structures all across Europe and perhaps even in eastern North America.

Two facts set the Basque peoples apart from the other Europeans who have dominated the continent the past 3,000 years: (1) The Basque language is distinctly different; and (2) The Basques have the highest recorded level of Rh-negative blood (roughly twice that of most Europeans), as well as substantially lower levels of Type B blood and a higher incidence of Type O blood.

Some probable technological feats of the Basques or their ancestors are:

Stonehenge and similar megalithic structures....A unique system of measurement based on the number 7, instead of 10, 12, or 60 Regular visits to North America long before Columbus to fish and to trade for beaver skins. Recently unearthed British customs records show large Basque imports of beaver pelts from 1380-1433. The invention of a sophisticated navigational device called an "abacus." (No relation to the common abacus.)

Q17. Are the Basques genetically different from other Europeans?

A17. Apparently, yes. It has long been known that the Basques have the highest proportion of rhesus-negative blood in Europe , and one of the highest percentages of type-O blood (55%). Recently, however, the geneticist Luiga Luca Cavalli-Sforza has completed a gene map of the peoples of Europe, and he finds the Basques to be strikingly different from their neighbors. The genetic boundary between Basques and non-Basques is very sharp on the Spanish side. On the French side, the boundary is more diffuse: it shades off gradually toward the Garonne in the north. These findings are entirely in agreement with what we know of the history of the language.

Q18. Does this mean the Basques are directly descended from the earliest known human inhabitants of Europe, the Cro-Magnon people who occupied western Europe around 35,000 years ago?

A18. Nobody knows. This is possible, but we have no real evidence either way. The only evidence we have is negative: the archeologists can find no evidence for any sudden change in population in the area for thousands of years before the arrival of the Celts and later the Romans in the first millennium BC.

The people of the Basque region have a greater than 50 percent concentration of the RH negative gene,. The frequency decreases in relation to the distance from the Basque region into the rest of the world until there is very little evidence of this gene. This genetic mapping helps to show that a mutation from RH positive to RH negative occurred somewhere in the Basque area of Europe maybe as much as 40,000 years ago, as he discussed later. Basques are not regional inhabitants of an area, as some believe - they are a completely separate and distinct race whose origins are shrouded in mystery.

Although to all outward appearances they seem to be part of the so called "white" or "caucassian" race group, they have distinct genetic differences which does not allow their being classified as part of that "white" race. For example : Basques are believed to have been the originators of the RH negative blood factor - the original genetic pool from which this factor came. While RH negatives are a small minority in the "white" and other races, and practically non-existent in "orientals", the current Basques still are over 33 % RH negative. Another salient genetic feature is the the shape and sutures (bone joints) of cranial bones of Basques[The Reptilian skull ridge]. A third skeletal difference is the tendency to having a thicker breast bone.

http://www.burlingtonnews.net/dann.html

Wasn't Jesus have said to have been a redhead?????

Edited October 4, 2006 by crystal sage

[rachelkleypassparrow]

I am blood group 'O'. One of my parents is A+ and one is O+

[Lion of Judah]

The accepted wisdom in paleontology circles is that all existing humans owe their origins to a single 'Eve' who lived in Africa about 200,000 years ago. Her descendants, they contend, migrated from their home continent and spread throughout the world supplanting, but not interbreeding with, populations of earlier hominids such as homo erectus and Neanderthal Man. Studies of mitochondrial DNA (which is transmitted only from female parents) showed, they believed, that this theory was a proven fact.

http://www.upliftprogram.com/h_evolution_01.html#h5

Eve was only the mother to a royal bloodline who are in contact with God and furthermore she was not out of Africa but of the first paradise Eden people like to asume that everyone is part of her but that is not the case for we would all have olive skin brown eyes and black hair.

Could you explain how we have different races today and why do people trust science so much when it can't explain how life began theres so much more to our Universe then we can begin to imagine.

[crystal sage]

Eve was only the mother to a royal bloodline who are in contact with God and furthermore she was not out of Africa but of the first paradise Eden people like to asume that everyone is part of her but that is not the case for we would all have olive skin brown eyes and black hair.

Could you explain how we have different races today and why do people trust science so much when it can't explain how life began theres so much more to our Universe then we can begin to imagine.

LOL.. I don't trust Science so much...They contradict themselves all the time... as seen by my various posts of manyscientific discoveries that vary so much in their results..that nothing seems to agree much...

It's like the world is a giant Lab experiment..of guesswork...and the most voted for ..or politically correct results get published... then after much more debate...they decide what gets taught... Often what children learn from they books sometimes vastly contradicts the new findings by modern scientist...So I'm beginning to think that their should be virtual e books for students to learn from that get updated every few months... with special index notices for updates for exams...to encourage the students to investigate themselves instead of being spoonfed their grandparents books....

Even history is changing with new discoveries..archeological digs and further research...

Look at modern history... how each country has a different view of what really happened..depending on what is politically correct to think and say....and of course they are going to try and put themselves in the best light..and cover up their mistakes....

A lot of history is written by the victors of war...etc...

A lot of science..discoveries...are influenced by the patrons... the sponsors...and religions...

How much is true!!!!!

I guess you need a real sense of humour..and a bit of descrimination...always know there are many sides to any answer... that we may only have part of the picture....

Just think of all the anomolies in history..in science..... all the information that doesn't fit accepted results and realities and are conveniantly left out ...the loose pieces of the puzzles..that give clues to a whole new picture.....

[Bokonontheancient]

Eve was only the mother to a royal bloodline who are in contact with God and furthermore she was not out of Africa but of the first paradise Eden people like to asume that everyone is part of her but that is not the case for we would all have olive skin brown eyes and black hair.

Could you explain how we have different races today and why do people trust science so much when it can't explain how life began theres so much more to our Universe then we can begin to imagine.

I have a question for you. How was God created? Science nor theology can explain currently how life began something had to start it, but that something is a mystery.

- Crystal Sage, what else is there besides science to trust? If we don't have science everything is pretty much out of imagination. You have to have science for proof. Although new evidence is found sometimes contradicting past hypotheses, it doesn't mean all past research is useless now. That's part of the process of science. Science is always trying to find a way to disprove itself, that's how we learn. But if there is no science, why believe anything?

- Bokonon

[Ashley-Star*Child]

I am also an O bloodtype.

[isis-999]

There's no way they can know what type blood Jesus had....

[Silentom]

Does anyone realize how much this concept of christ actually having O type blood dwells into BS?

Edited October 5, 2006 by Silentom

[Ashley-Star*Child]

Jesus was supposed to be AB-.

[odas]

I have a question for you. How was God created? Science nor theology can explain currently how life began something had to start it, but that something is a mystery.

- Crystal Sage, what else is there besides science to trust? If we don't have science everything is pretty much out of imagination. You have to have science for proof. Although new evidence is found sometimes contradicting past hypotheses, it doesn't mean all past research is useless now. That's part of the process of science. Science is always trying to find a way to disprove itself, that's how we learn. But if there is no science, why believe anything?

- Bokonon

This time I have to agree with you. What I am afraid about science is if we start believing in scinece in a dogmatic way, like we believe in religion, with no accepted room for error or modification.

Regarding Adam and Eve, if we look closely into Genesis, we will see that Adam and Eve are not the first humans created, but the first to whom the soul ( spirit?) was given.

That is how I understand it, but there is always room for other opinions.

Interesting is how Eve was created. God ( the CEO of the intergalactic sociaty ) put Adam to sleep, he waited when Adam was in a tight sleep to take his rib out to create Eve.

Later he closed the wound with flesh.

For me it is a description of a normal todays surgery, including narcose and stiches.

From the rib, God took the DNA, modified it and created a woman.

No matter how we look at it, it is still interesting. One can say, yes, they ppreformed surgeries before but then we can't say that those people, thousend of years ago were primitive.

[zandore]

Mainly because it's DNA doesn'y link with the others....

And your point is......

[QueenOftheCramped]

Interesting is how Eve was created. God ( the CEO of the intergalactic sociaty ) put Adam to sleep, he waited when Adam was in a tight sleep to take his rib out to create Eve.

Later he closed the wound with flesh.

For me it is a description of a normal todays surgery, including narcose and stiches.

From the rib, God took the DNA, modified it and created a woman.

No matter how we look at it, it is still interesting. One can say, yes, they ppreformed surgeries before but then we can't say that those people, thousend of years ago were primitive.

In the original hebrew language, the word later falsely translated with rib, meant side, or more accurately, part of the other. If an interpretation is needed, the ancient idea of Polarity, Yin and Yang, male and female being to parts of a whole, makes much more sense, at least to me. No rib anywhere!

[QueenOftheCramped]

CrystalSage: Another salient genetic feature is the the shape and sutures (bone joints) of cranial bones of Basques[The Reptilian skull ridge]. A third skeletal difference is the tendency to having a thicker breast bone.

The reptilian skull ridge??? I guess they're talking about the sagittal crest? A cranial feature common to many primate species, including 'early man'. It's function was to provide a sufficiently big surface to attach the powerful jaw muscles needed to chew tough vegetation. It devolved with the change of diet , adaptation to eating more prepared food, more meat etc...

CrystalSage: LOL.. I don't trust Science so much...They contradict themselves all the time... as seen by my various posts of manyscientific discoveries that vary so much in their results..that nothing seems to agree much...A lot of science..discoveries...are influenced by the patrons... the sponsors...and religions

That's why you quote from websites such as 'The reptilian agenda', from which the above quotes with regards to Basques & the'Reptilian skull ridge' was taken?? And which also states:

"Rh-negative women and men have several "Unusual Traits" that Rh-positives don't. Some call them "Reptilian Traits".

* An EXTRA-Vertebra (a "Tail Bone")....some are born with a tail(called a "Cauda").

* Lower than normal Body Temperature

* Lower than normal Blood Pressure

* Higher mental analytical abilities.

* Higher Negative-ion shielding (from positive "charged" virus/bacteria)around the body.

* High Sensitivity to EM and ELF Fields.

* Hyper Vision and other senses.

* Etc. " link

!

Edited October 5, 2006 by QueenOftheCramped