New Moon 1/11/33/120

Dear Friends,                                                                                       

Last Sabbath we dealt with the line of the nations and showed how it was impossible that modern humans came out of Africa 78,000 Years Before Present (YBP). The Appendix A to that message showed the YDNA Family tree down to Haplogroup F.

This week we will rearrange the tree so as to show more easily the YDNA lines of Noah and his sons Shem, Ham and Japheth and how the mutations occurred from that lineage, and how they further mutated among the sons of Shem and Japheth. 

Noah was pure in his generations (Gen. 6:9). The RSV renders it: “blameless in his generation” but it is considered that it was his genetic structure to which the text referred.

The YDNA line from Adam was essentially a pre M412, M139 structure which formed the core of the YDNA structure of modern humans. Noah passed on to each of his sons the root capacity of M168 and P9. Ham passed to each of his sons the core capacity or genetic preconditions that enabled mutations that resulted in Hgs. A, B, C and DE. The nature of the mutations is such that there are some conclusions that follow necessarily from those mutations, and also from the distribution for the mtDNA mutations that followed. We can draw some amazing conclusions from the logic of those mutations and distribution.

The first logical deduction we are required to make is that of how many people were there on the Ark. The Bible says that there were eight people. This answer to this question raises with it some serious questions as to what is being referred to here. When referring to the eight people are we speaking of four men and four women, which has been the usual supposition of Bible students over the years? The fact that they were assumed to be monogamous is also taken for granted. There are a number of biblical and scientific objections to this view. The Bible also indicates that with the first wine harvest and the intoxication and abuse of Noah, coupled with the fact that Canaan was alive and old enough to be considered responsible for his actions against his grandfather Noah and to be faced with such a severe penalty, that Canaan must have been of a significantly adult age. Coupled with other considerations of the Haplogroup mutation it is likely that there were eight men, being Noah and his three sons and the others were the four sons of Ham. This then raises questions as to the mothers. Were they all from the same woman or were they sons of different women?  We will see from the mutations of the genes and the Bible story that they may well have had different mothers, even if they were of a slightly similar mtDNA structure but were nevertheless divergent.

We now know for certain that the original female mtDNA was Haplogroup L. We also know for certain that the original Hg. L is now confined to Africa; hence the origin of the “Out of Africa” hypothesis. There seems little doubt that the line of Eve was dark skinned or at the very least she had the melanin and physiological capacity to develop into the current modern African female. She was Haplogroup L as was the original mtDNA group. DNA science holds that the mutation rates are very slow and in fact far slower than they actually are. Further, science has assumed that mtDNA does not affect the human genome and has no part in genetic mutations. Both of these premises are now proven to be completely false. The basis of the changes is discussed in the paper Genetic Origin of the Nations (No. 265).

The amount of background radiation affects the rate of mutation of human DNA. Human mtDNA has been proven to mutate at a rate of up to one mutation per generation in areas of high background radiation, as we saw in the Kerala experiments referred to in the paper above. Also, mtDNA has been shown to induce mutation across the entire human genome. Thus background radiation mutates mtDNA at a high rate, as it does to YDNA. The mutations to the mtDNA increase the mutation rates of YDNA independently of background radiation, thus further compounding the rate of mutation. So we see that when combined the two effects on mutation must logically increase the rate at an increasing rate due to cross exposure to further mutation in the mtDNA. Thus the rate of mutation can be many times that assumed by science to justify their evolutionary models. The entire structure of the argument rests on known false premises and must be dismissed until adjusted adequately.

We can also prove from known DNA results that the original DNA were linked with and spread in conjunction with known mtDNA base groups. For example, the early aboriginal finds were in eight waves of three YDNA Haplogroups and three mtDNA Haplogoups. These were YDNA Hg. C4a and C4b, Hg. K and Rx r1basic. The female mtDNA Haplogroups match the male groups more or less precisely. For this study we can see that the Hamitic C4 groups match to the female Hg. N basic which is the first mutation from L3. So we can deduce that L being the original saw the division present on the ark as being mutations of L and perhaps L1 or L2 (although L2 could have been a subsequent mutation of L and L3 mutated to N and then M). The early divisions of L3 into N basic had to occur before C4 moved into Australia. These links must have been the earliest movements of the Cushite Hg. C out of the Middle East into Asia and to Australia.  We can thus deduce that the mutation of Hg. N basic must have occurred from L3 at the earliest times after the flood. Thus there is a possibility that Hg. N basic was from at least one of the wives of Noah’s sons and was seemingly on the ark. The other deductions might be that as N basic is not a major factor in Africa, the sons of Ham who were YDNA Hgs. A and B did not marry into that mutation but rather retained wives from the base L1 and L2 mutations.

For L2 to have been formed, L must have been on the ark or L2 was formed before it and all three mutations of L1, L2 and L3 were there. As there were no further mutations from L the original L must have seen mutations beforehand and the original L had perhaps ceased to exist. Thus there must have been mtDNA Hgs. L1, L3, and probably N on the ark. As mtDNA Hg. M mutated from Hg. N it is not necessary for it to have been on the ark.

It is obvious that there is a bottleneck situation with L and no further mutations were seen from that or from L1 and L2 and all subsequent mutations came from mtDNA Hgs. N and M, and subsequently from N as R supergroup and the subsequent groups. This gave rise to the assertion that the mutation of N and M etc. took place out of Africa. The biblical explanation is that the situation occurred in the Middle East and that the sons of Ham were given Africa as their inheritance and moved into there after the flood and on the dispersion. The fact that YDNA Hgs. C, D and some E were found well outside of Africa and spread all over the world does not logically support the “Out of Africa” theory. 

In fact it supports the reverse of the theory. The African plate actually includes west of the Jordan fault right up into Lebanon to the coast. So we might conclude that some of them were “in Africa.” However, the land of Cush or Khus was north of the Euphrates. The fact is that biblically the lands of Eden went down to Egypt and the Nile and to the Mediterranean coast. This is the likely logical candidate for the dispersion and that is exactly where the Bible places it.   

It is likely that the wives of YDNA Hgs. A and B were L1 and L2 as those groups went into Africa together and stayed there. The wives of the rest were mtDNA L3 and N basic. M may well have been there also but it appears that N was spread over the others and mutated. It is likely that mtDNA Hg. N was the more prolific of the mtDNA among the sons of Noah. The other two sons of Ham may well have married Hg. N as did Shem and Japheth. That would explain the distribution and subsequent mutations more easily.

The presence of N basic with C4 indicates that the daughters of mtDNA Hg. N married into the Cushites very early or were there originally. Also note that there was no retention of the M168 P9 in the YDNA Hgs. A and B. This was either because they moved into Africa before the intervention at Babel and did not have it initially or, alternatively, they lost it in the viral/nuclear activities there. Hg. A mutated from the early sequence or so it seems.  

What we can see is that nothing of which we know in the DNA Science does not support the Bible structure and in fact helps to explain the Bible questions more efficiently. The things that conflict with the Bible, when examined, show that the long-term conjectures are false and the attempts at elongating the time frames are based on fraudulent pseudo-science. See chart at Appendix A.

Wade Cox
Coordinator General