An interesting "anomaly" in DNA research which suggests that Neanderthals and modern humans share DNA from relatively recent mixing between them, is validating that interbreeding between early races of man led to the appearance of a more modern human. While scientists theorize a split in common ancestry of human ancestors and Neanderthals being around 350,000 years ago, the new DNA research suggests that interbreeding occurred 35,000 years ago.
This of course challenges all previous theories of human ancestries, including the evolution of man. For one thing, if modern humans and Neanderthals interbred around 35,000 years ago, they must have been the same species otherwise they could not have produced viable offspring. Another is that it also suggests that the disappearance of the Neanderthal can be attributed to interbreeding with modern human so that the more "primitive" features of the earlier neanderthals are no longer distinguishable. As for evolution theory postulating a process of primitive (ape-like) man over millions of years becoming "evolved" into a more sophisticated biological form, this new genetic research is highlighting much faulty reasoning. One shaky leg of evolutionists' construct is the shared ancestor of various similar or not so similar species --- all these species breed only with their own. Yet man, according to the same shaky leg, can diverge into two different species but much later down the path can interbreed successfully with the other branch which was already its own specie. On the other hand, evolutionists believe horses and donkeys diverged from a common ancestor 4 million years ago and they cannot successfully procreate other than to produce one generation of a sterile cross breed. Oahspe has accurately identified the various types of man as races because they are in fact of the family of man, as proven by their ability to interbreed with offspring that can reproduce.
The genetic research findings indicating the interbreeding of "modern" humans with Neanderthals are consistent with the history and chronology of the ancient races of man according to Oahspe. The first races of man came about through the one time blending of animal man (Asu also called Adam in ancient legends) with materialized ethereans (angels). These offspring of this blend of animal (Asu) and angel man were distinguished from each other by the more or less ratio of animal to angel. This was expressed in their physiology, intellectual capacity and spiritual potential. The first intermixing occurred around 76,000 years ago resulting in a race of man that was half animal - half angel. These were called I'hins. They were diminutive, well shaped humans with shorter arms and longer legs with the ability to walk upright. They were also capable of speech and could perceive their angel forebears. This ability to perceive their forebears was the su'is sight (ability to see spirits and spiritual things) which was passed on in more or less degree to all of their descendants.
The second mix which was the offspring of I'hin and Asu, were called Druk. Because their angel heritage was far less than that of the I'hin, they were unable to see or comprehend spiritual things, neither could they walk upright or speak. Then the third mix, involving the Druks and the I'hins produced the I'huan (from which we get the name "Hu-man"), the equivalent of the first modern man. The crucial difference between the Druks and the I'huans and I'hins was that both the I'huans and the I'hins were capable of eternal life which was the survival of spirit following corporeal death. But the spirit of Druks could not crystalize into everlasting existence due to their ratio of angel/animal heritage.
The earlier Druk races had crossed with I'hins and produced I'huans at least 3 times since 76,000 years ago. Through interbreeding or "retrobreeding" back into the Druk races, the I'huans were lost as a distinct race after the first two times they appeared, the first time being around 76,000 years ago and the second somewhere around 40,000 - 50,000 years ago, according to Oahspe. The appearance of modern human fossils with archaic features approximately 40,000 years old, also co-relates with this second appearance of I'huans as detailed in Oahspe. (See reference below.)
The "modern human" DNA which scientists have found in Neanderthal (Druk) genes is consistent with the chronology of the ancient races of man as given in Oahspe. Modern (today's) humans, being a more or less hybrid of I'hin and Druk would be sufficiently similar to the earlier so called modern humans of 40,000 years ago as to have close to identical DNA (as they are both I'huan, the "hybrid" between I'hin and Druk).
The mixing of the I'huans (Modern Man) and Druks (Neandeathal) after the second appearance of the I'huans 40,000 - 50,000 years ago, is also consistent with DNA research suggesting cross breeding around 35,000 years ago. Since it appears as though the I'huans remained distinct from the Druks right up until the cycle before Aph, being about 28,000 years ago. (Oahspe, Synopsis of 16 cycles)
And here also is an interesting correlation between Oahspe's account and the fossil record, for it was 28,000 years ago that the fossil record indicates the last of the Neanderthals disappeared off the face of the earth. And even more recent changes in `modern' human to `more modern' human are also evidenced in fossil records. These also validate Oahspe's account of the last significant interbreeding of the races, which led to the modern Ghans (beginning 18,000 years ago, including the more advanced Listians (forebears of the Shepherd Kings of Par'sie'e). and a retrogression of Ghan and Druk in Heleste during the Fragapatti's cycle being around 8,000 years ago.
It seems that the loss of the I'huan following the second round (the first being around 76,000 years ago and the second around 40,000 - 50,000 years ago) by interbreeding with Druks, produced a druk that was "less primitive" or in more complete terms, with a higher ratio of angel inheritance to asu animal inheritance, than before. So that by the time of the flood, there were a predominance of druks who had a higher ratio of I'huan heritage; and these were referred to as `barbarian' (Bk of Aph), being distinguished from earlier Druks. When these mixed with the I'hin after the flood, to manifest the third appearance of I'huans, their offspring had a sufficient ratio of angel/animal heritage to be further refined by interbreeding with I'hins to produce a higher ratio of angel to animal heritage in the first of the Ghans (modern man) in Apollo's cycle about 18,000 years ago.
Some Ancient Races of Man (Oahspe)
Included in the various races of man were a wide range of physical characteristics. The I'hins were small and gracile with fine features and hair. The Druks were stout with long arms and short legs, The I'huans were tall and copper colored. There were also in-betweens, the Yak being a mix between Druk and I'huan. Moreover, there were differences in each of the races through the ages. At one point the I'hins some had become very small and, at least twice the Druks had become very large --- called giants.
Oahspe, Synopsis of 16 Cycles; 09/1.22.
Now, for the most part, all the people had become I’hins, small, white and yellow. Nevertheless there were ground people, with long arms, who were large; but they dwelt by themselves, and their food was of all types of flesh, fish and creeping things. The ground people were brown and black, and they lived to be two hundred, and even four hundred years old.
Oahspe, The Lord's First Book; 11/1.29.
But there were giants (druks) in those days and in time after that; and my chosen came to them, and they bore children to them also.
National Ggeographic News, Jan 7, 2007.
|| Neanderthals disappeared from the fossil record 28,000 years ago, about 12,000 years after modern humans began to spread across Europe. (Related: "Neanderthals' Last Stand Was in Gibraltar, Study Suggests" [September 13, 2006].)......... The skull was discovered in a cave in southwestern Romania and is at least 29,000 years old. A jawbone found nearby with similar morphological traits is dated to 40,500 years ago. The researchers conclude both specimens are about 40,000 years old. Comparisons to other skulls suggest the Romanian skull clearly belongs to a modern human, said paper co-author Erik Trinkaus, an anthropologist at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri.
"But some characteristics are extremely unusual and rather archaic," he said. For example, the forehead is "extremely long and flat" when compared to modern humans from western Europe and Africa, Trinkaus said. And the molars are the largest ever documented for modern humans...... These differences suggest that "modern human evolution did not stop when people we call moderns appeared," he said. "There have been significant changes in human anatomy since the time we have the first modern humans."
Moreover, Trinkaus said, the unusual features suggest intermixing between modern humans and Neanderthals.......... the skull shows "there is continuing evolution for the modern human skull even after humans got to Europe and other places in the world. But, he said, as the authors point out, the skull lacks uniquely Neanderthal traits and thus does not prove interbreeding. In fact, he said, similar archaic traits are found in modern human remains found in a cave in China.
Nevertheless, he added, evidence for interbreeding between modern humans and Neanderthals would not be a surprise."||
Arstechnica Journal, Science Article, Oct 15, 2007;
Human Sequences Cropping up in Neanderthal Genome
||........the Nature paper suggested that modern humans and Neanderthals shared a common ancestor more recently, and may have interbred after their separation...........They discovered that the data in the Nature paper contains sequence differences that appear to have arisen recently within the human lineage, which suggested something was wrong. Performing an estimation of the human- Neanderthal split date using the Nature data produced a value of 35,000 years, which is completely incompatible with the fossil record. Finally, using a date of 350,000 years for the split (obtained using the data from the Science paper), they found that the Nature data indicated extremely high levels of interbreeding between humans and Neanderthals; the Science data continued to suggest there was none.
All of these results point to one conclusion: the Neanderthal sequence in the Nature paper looks far more like that of modern humans than any other data would suggest is possible. Of course, there's a simple and obvious explanation for that discrepancy: the sequence is from modern humans. ....||
A "Ghost" species of Ancient Humans; July 2017
||........ a "ghost" species of archaic humans may have contributed genetic material to ancestors of people living in Sub-Saharan Africa today.The research adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that sexual rendezvous between different archaic human species may not have been unusual.
Past studies have concluded that the forebears of modern humans in Asia and Europe interbred with other early hominin species, including Neanderthals and Denisovans. The new research is among more recent genetic analyses indicating that ancient Africans also had trysts with other early hominins.
"It seems that interbreeding between different early hominin species is not the exception --- it's the norm," says Omer Gokcumen, PhD, an assistant professor of biological sciences in the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences.
"Our research traced the evolution of an important mucin protein called MUC7 that is found in saliva. When we looked at the history of the gene that codes for the protein, we see the signature of archaic admixture in modern day Sub-Saharan African populations."
As part of this investigation, the team examined the MUC7 gene in more than 2,500 modern human genomes. The analysis yielded a surprise: A group of genomes from Sub-Saharan Africa had a version of the gene that was wildly different from versions found in other modern humans.
The Sub-Saharan variant was so distinctive that Neanderthal and Denisovan MUC7 genes matched more closely with those of other modern humans than the Sub-Saharan outlier did.
"Based on our analysis, the most plausible explanation for this extreme variation is archaic introgression --- the introduction of genetic material from a "ghost" species of ancient hominins"..... ||
All Oahspe references are from the Standard Edition Oahspe of 2007