"OF ALL THE GREAT FIELDS OF SCIENTIFIC STUDY NONE HAS BEEN MORE CONTROVERSIAL THAN THE STUDY OF THE ORIGINS OF THE RACES AND SO-CALLED 'HUMAN BIODIVERSITY'..."
HUMAN BIODIVERSITY AND THE HIDDEN ORIGINS OF THE CAUCASIAN RACE
PUBLISHED: 15th February, 2017 | By COLIN GRUNWALD
*** Author’s Note: I do not believe in the superiority of the Caucasian Race nor do I endorse the racial superiority of any group or right to dominate another group or race. Rather I believe each racial group (mixed or pure) has its own strengths and weaknesses as well as sovereign territory from which it should be allowed to exist un-molested by external groups. Mostly I am interested in discovering our true origins and the possible re-writing of history. ***
Of all the great fields of scientific study none has been more controversial than the study of the origins of the races and so-called "human biodiversity". One must enter into this topic with great caution and trepidation: snoops, activists and snowflakes abound, ready to report any transgressions from the current egalitarian narrative to the guardians of the status quo in academia, media and government. This topic is a mine field that can only be navigated with a map, a sense of boldness and earnest desire to truly find out what is on the other side. So mysterious and deep is this topic I find, that it causes the researcher to begin to question just about everything associated with his or her own existence on planet earth. It is simultaneously murky, ugly, filled with pitfalls, snakes and goblins ready to ruin the career of anyone who dare go forth.
Given the plethora of contradictory information on the subject (i.e. if race does not exist how can racism exist?), one must ponder where in fact we ever did come from. Perhaps we are not even *from* here at all(?). In the search for the answer one finds an experience similar to Plato’s Cave with opposition from nearly every possible angle - everyone wants to watch the latest racial equality movie out of Hollywood to vomit up all the old, already-known, already-predigested narratives of the "oneness" of the races and our indivisibility beyond the color of our skins and well, a few other oddball differences that we are told are just trivial.
Much of this came about as a direct results of the aftermath of WWII and the destruction of Nazi Germany and its forced labor and death camps. It has been taught to us (if one accepts Hollywood's scripting of the Nazi ideology as told by the conquering nations) that the Nazis believed the Germanic-Nordic race to be a superior "Master Race" and hence justified in conquering and enslaving the other races (which we are told don't exist anyways). Thus the new orthodoxy post WWII, revolved around the complete banishing of the topic of race primarily out of fear. Indeed the UN even went so far as to banish the study of race as a science!
To break free from this orthodoxy results in attacks not only from social justice warriors screaming about equality and how there is only "One Race, The Human Race" but also from traditional Darwinian Evolutionists who claim all humans and races descended from a single primate several hundred thousand years ago (which progressed into modern humans for reasons only Richard Dawkins seems to understand). Never mind that all the "missing link" primate skeletons later turned out to be hoaxes (more on that later) or the giant skeletons that have popped up numerous times in archeology only to disappear later - forget about all that - you just gotta believe what the *experts* tell you...right?
Time for the red pill....
The truth of the matter is that no one currently fully understands the origins of the races. I most certainly do not. And thus I will make no attempt to offer a single coherent theory for you on said origins but rather only to bring you up to date with the most current understanding, based on the most salient and up-to-date research as well as more esoteric theories of the past that have since been banished and discarded but actually better fit the data than even pure Darwinian Evolutionary Theory. My primary goal is thus to draw you *away* from racial orthodoxy and into a new understanding of the biodiversity of the human species in a manner that is consistent with the most cutting edge research as well as historical and archeological evidence.
So here we go...
To begin with a study of the topic we must consider first that even the current orthodoxy on race (or what is left of it post-WWII) accepts that there are (for the most part) three primary races: Caucasian, Negro and Mongoloid (i.e. "white", "black" and "asian"). No apologies if those terms offend you - they were once orthodox until modern political correctness came along and declared these terms hateful. I will use them because they are scientific terms, not hateful ones. And bare in mind this does not include *extinct* races of which there are likely half a dozen or so more including Neanderthals, pygmies and possibly even giants.
These different races have unique characteristics associated with them which extend far beyond skin color. Skeletal structure, skull shape and bone density all vary between these races. Intuitively we understand these differences and once you see a few examples of a Caucasian skull with the higher brow it is fairly easy to distinguish from the negro skull which tend to have more flattened noses and are thicker around the brow or even mongoloid skulls which have higher cheek bones. Once the differences become apparent they cannot be "unseen".
Additionally there are the genetic factors that indicate which races are prone to certain diseases. African Americans for instance have a much higher risk factor for sickle-cell anemia. Each race has a unique profile of risk factors which can be distributed even more specifically by family.
“Human biodiversity (hbd) is very simply the diversity found among and between human populations that has a biological basis. Each of us is biologically unique. our genomes, our phonemes, our patterns of gene expression, our epi-genomes, our microbiomes — none of these are ever exactly the same in any two individuals, even identical twins. Yes, you are a special snowflake! You’re not even the same person today biologically that you were when you were six, or sixteen. For one thing, your patterns of gene expression as an adult are quite different from what you experienced as a toddler. Each individual human is biologically diverse when compared to all other humans and even across his or her own lifetime. And while we’re at it, you’re biologically diverse within yourself, too — cell by cell.”
- HBD Chick
Actually, the problem with these genetic profiles for disease is the medical community often fails to reveal to you the full cross correlation of any given disease by race. Sometimes this information has to be inferred from the available evidence as we cannot rely on the medical community itself to connect dots that form an uncomfortable picture of racial biodiversity and disease propagation. What if I were to tell you for instance that roughly 15% of the population of Northern Europe is immune to HIV? You would probably tell me I was lying, but its true. They've known this for a while yet did not discuss it explicitly and never bothered to investigate why (probably because the answer would reveal something else that they must keep hidden):
“Biologists at the University of Liverpool have discovered how the plagues of the Middle Ages have made around 10% of Europeans resistant to HIV.
Scientists have known for some time that these individuals carry a genetic mutation (known as CCR5-delta 32) that prevents the virus from entering the cells of the immune system but have been unable to account for the high levels of the gene in Scandinavia and relatively low levels in areas bordering the Mediterranean.”
Notice however in the article above they attempt to claim that HIV resistance developed as a result of the bubonic plague. This is absurd as the plague was a bacterial infection, not a virus. Therefore there is no logical reason why a subset of Europeans would have such an immunity. After all, how could immunity to a disease be acquired *before* a population experienced an infection?
The population that is immune to HIV has a particular blood type that not only is immune but can be used in blood transfusions to cure someone who is not immune to HIV. Note that the media is trying to bury this story as well by claiming it is fake but I suspect it is more likely due to the fact that if people understood exactly what makes certain people immune to HIV via blood types the whole lid covering up human biodiversity would be blown clean off and race realism would begin explode in popularity which obviously the powers that be would wish to avoid:
“A group of doctors from Barcelona have experimented on blood-transfusion as a way of curing HIV because of a man who was said to be healed of the virus after a blood transfusion. A 37-year-old man from Barcelona claimed to have been suffering from HIV when he was suddenly healed of the virus after a blood transfusion. The man has Leukemia which has required him to get the blood transfusion”.
The story above dose not reveal what *type* of blood is used to cure the HIV positive patient (of course in doing so it would likely leave too many clues for others). But what type of blood can be universally donated to others? That blood is called O- blood (Type O blood that is Rhesus Negative). Thus, one could speculate (assuming the current scientific and medical orthodoxy is attempting to hide this uncomfortable truth from us) that the HIV immune populations of Northern Europe are the same as the Type O- population (which is also rather high in Northern Europe). Certainly the HIV immune populations and Rh- populations have similar dispersion profiles (both roughly 15% of the population) and are at least likely part of a similar genetic package.
The negative blood types by the way, are known as Rh- which stands for "Rhesus Negative" as mentioned above. What does this mean? It refers to a human antigen that attaches to human blood cells and is also found in a Rhesus Monkey. And well, that is quite interesting because the Rhesus Monkey, we are told, was the first species found to be infected with HIV and transfer it to humans. Thus humans with the antigen Rh+ protein may very well be the ones susceptible to HIV. But a protein alone wouldn't make you susceptible to HIV - more likely it is other more complex factors associated with your DNA and blood composition that make you susceptible and which express themselves in various ways including blood proteins. In other words Rh+ individuals have primate blood susceptible to a broader spectrum of diseases that primates are susceptible to vs. those that Rh- people and northern Europeans have.
Even more troubling is that if an Rh- mother gives birth to an Rh+ baby of an Rh+ father, it will necessarily result in a blood incompatibility whereby the mother’s blood may attack the baby due to the presence of the Rh+ protein which could result in a miscarriage. Therefore, Rh- mothers need to be given special drugs to avoid this condition. This condition simply does not exist anywhere in the animal kingdom and has no logical explanation that fits within standard evolutionary theory.
The whole Rh- blood phenomenon goes even deeper than that into the realm of the legends of Atlantis. The highest levels of Rh- blood in the world occur in the Basque Region of Spain which is geographically isolated and where the people to this day retain a memory of having escaped a great flood by boat and arriving on the continent thousands of years ago. Indeed some locals say they are the direct descendants of Atlantis. While this may seem far fetched, the Basque language is phonetically and grammatically isolated from the rest of the Indo-European languages. It bears some resemblance to Sanskrit. Thus, the Basque population is known to be both genetically and culturally isolated throughout history.
The geographical dispersion of the Rh- blood types clearly shows a pattern that is inconsistent with the human migration patterns we have been taught (i.e. Siberian land bridge). Rather they seem to show an epicenter of a particular Rh- pure-blooded race originating somewhere in the south Atlantic Ocean. Note that outside of non-white Europe, only certain eastern Meso-American tribes (notably the Cherokees), North African tribes (Berbers) as well as the historical Guanches (Canary Islands) carry this rarer blood type. This runs completely counter to current archeological and racial migration theory as it would put the focal point of dispersion smack dab in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean – hence the association with Atlantis.
IBERIAN CHARACTERS REPORTEDLY FOUND ETCHED IN A 6,000 YEAR-OLD BONE AT LA CORUÑA IN GALICIA, NORTHERN SPAIN
"But even though these languages are apparently related, why imagine they all originated in North Africa? A quick look at any map will show the geographical proximity of these areas to Plato's Atlantis. It may be that none of these needed to "cross" the Straits of Gibraltar. If Cro-Magnon simultaneously appeared on the western shores of both continents, as most physical anthropologists insist, then so did his language. No evidence has been found to indicate that Cro-Magnon's origin was in North Africa (see my Anthropology page), so why would his language originate there? In other words, to bring it down to our terms, if Cro-Magnon originated in Atlantis, so did his language. (Click here for a linguistic map illustrating those relationships)"
DISTRIBUTION OF RH- TYPE BLOOD IN NATIVE POPULATIONS OF EUROPE (RED IS HIGHEST OR > 20%). NOTICE THE COASTAL MIGRATION PATTERN
Notice the focal point around the Basque region of Spain and that the Rh- populations die off fair quickly outside of Europe (save for the Berbers of Africa, the Guanche and certain Native American populations).
Even more troubling for evolutionary theory is blood type compatibility which runs counter to it. Allow me to explain:
Type O can donate to type A and Type B but not the reverse.
Type A and Type B can donate to Type AB but not the reverse.
Rh- can donate to Rh+ but not the reverse.
Thus a type O- person is a universal donor to all other blood types. But do type O- people disperse evenly among the races? No, they don't nor do blood types in general – there is a distinct cross-correlation pattern of blood types by race (i.e. they form a high Pearson Correlation Coefficient when cross correlated). The Rh- types are typically blonde or red haired with blue or green eyes. They are known to be sensitive to migraines and other unusual stimulus but even more troubling for evolutionary theory is they are known to have an extra disc in their spines as well as an extra rib. Looking more deeply into blood type factors one can find all kinds of evidence of racial groups having distinct blood types.
If we accept that Rh- types are more likely to be Caucasian (see table below) with blonde/red hair and blue/green eyes it would run counter to the idea that white, lighter skinned people evolved from darker skinned people (having evolved from primates/monkeys). This is due to the fact that forward evolution would likely produce forward inherited blood compatibility vs. the rather strange backwards compatible blood type of Rh- peoples. It would make a lot more sense if darker skinned people were the most common Rh- types if indeed, as we are told, Africans are the common ancestors of all the white races who branched off from them 65 thousand years ago. You might notice for instance, that it is mostly white people who donate blood and mostly non-white people who receive it. Literally, more often than not, they need our blood and not the reverse. Thus the standard human evolutionary tree is incompatible with blood type theory.
Truth be told there are some Rh- people in Africa but this seems to be a result of admixture with the Berbers and Guanches (now extinct) who are an indigenous white population (again often light hair and blue/green eyes) living in the Atlas Mountains of Morocco and Canary Islands respectively (Atlas btw being one of the founding God Emperors of Atlantis - perhaps these mountains were a good landing spot after the Flood of Atlantis or Biblical Deluge? Alas I digress). Those tribes, it would appear are likely the descendants of the even more ancient Guanches of the Canary Islands who appear to have been even more racially pure and isolated until the Spaniard conquered them:
"Espinosa says of the Teneriffa that the Guanche in the south of the island were darker, that in the north a white skin color was predominant and that the women there were attractive and blond...The most striking characteristic of the ancient Canarians is the extraordinarily high frequency of blood group O (note this indicates donor blood – author is likely mistaking this with O- or more specifically Rh-). Such high proportions are not known even in living European populations. The ancient Canarians are however, closely followed by the Berberic tribes of the High Atlas where the percentage of blood type O reached as high as 78% (also highest concentrations of Rh- blood rivaled only by the Basque region of Spain)...The (Atlas) mountains are surely an 'area of retreat'; but they undoubtedly do not isolate so completely as was the case with the islands. All recent populations of North Africa, in particular the Arabians, are characterized by a much lower percentage of O blood types"
Biogeography and Ecology in the Canary Islands
- G. Kunkel
We already know that Berbers have some of the highest concentrations of Rh- blood and are the lightest and palest people in Africa (essentially white) thus from the author’s text above we can easily infer that the Guanches were mostly type O- and were the original source of said blood type for the entire continent of Africa (but from where did they get it?). The scientific article titled “Blood groups (Rh, ABO) in the population of Gran Canaria (Canary Islands, Spain).” (published in 1969 in the Journal of Human Heredity) presumably draws this same conclusion however it must be purchased to download (note this type of information is *extremely* difficult to get a hold of). In other words, darker skinned people who have the type O and even more recessive Rh- blood likely merely acquired this through interbreeding (racial conquering) with lighter skinned, pure blooded type O- who may have also intermixed with other racial types (Neanderthal, mongoloid, etc.). We can see clearly from statistical information by race that Rh- blood is (generally speaking) mostly associated with Caucasians (more than double the incidence for Africans and Hispanics and 8 times the rate of incidence for Asians):
While it may not be entirely clear or provable that O- blood was once uniquely Caucasian, what is 100% clear is that it is primarily white people who donate blood and primarily non-white people who receive it:
“Of the 389 340 blood donations reported by donors aged 16 to 69 years (98.7% of all donations), the collections were from white (77.7%), African American (16.3%), Hispanic (2.3%), Asian (2.2%), and other (1.6%) donors. Forty- to 49-year-olds (26.8%) donated the highest percentage of units. The blood donor rates were 11 per 1000 population for whites, 6 per 1000 for African Americans and 3 per 1000 population for Hispanics. The blood donation rates were 77 donations per 1000 population for whites, 22 per 1000 population for African Americans and 10 per 1000 population for Hispanics”.
If ever anyone wanted to end racism against whites, the easiest way would be to convince whites to stop donating their blood (unless it was to someone in their own family who needed it). This would immediately re- establish the necessity of the white race for survival by other races who are currently under the pretence that not only do they not need us but that they would be better off without us. Even more bizarre is that one can find stories and conspiracy theories about Rh- and O- blood types being gang stalked. It seems the government and secret societies have some sort of perverse interest in these individuals.
None the less, likely even those of us who are fair skinned with blue or green eyes, have mixed blood in our ancestry due to the amount of racial interbreeding that has gone on historically. However, given the totality of evidence above, it begs the question of whether it is possible thus that the Caucasian race evolved on a completely separate branch of evolution? Is the same true for the other primary races? What if the Caucasian race mixed with other unknown hominids and primates now extinct producing new hybrid species of negro and mongoloid including other races now extinct? What if Caucasians are actually the most ancient race?
Is it possible that Caucasians are in fact a primary race more ancient than even Africans but of unknown origin? Modern DNA samples of Caucasians have been compared with ancient Cro-Magnon (Caucasian) DNA and concluded that Caucasian DNA has not changed or drifted significantly for *at least* 28,000 years. That is 28,000 years of essentially *no* evolutionary drift (just minor differences).
“Scientific evidence refuting the popular theory of modern humanity’s African genesis is common knowledge among those familiar with the most recent scientific papers on the human Genome, Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomes. Regrettably, within mainstream press and academia circles, there seems to be a conspicuous – and dare we say it – deliberate vacuum when it comes to reporting news of these recent studies and their obvious implications.”
Currently the egalitarians at the UN and other guardians of academia are trying to convince people that Rh- blood came from Neanderthals which is also easily debunked:
“What this all means is that it is extremely unlikely that the common form of Rh- blood originated in Neanderthals and then spread into humans through breeding. It simply arose too long ago for this to be true.”
An ivory tusk has been found from nearly that long ago showing the faces of Caucasian/Cro-Magnons and they look almost identical to today. The facial features are strikingly modern. Furthermore, it would appear the person who carved it was a skilled craftsman, far more advanced in their trade than modern humans would have suspected for something carved 24,000 years ago.
If we take ancient manuscripts from the antiquities along with skeletal evidence and the legends of aboriginals from around the globe, white people once lived *everywhere* on the planet long before whites rediscovered the structures I personally believed were built by their own ancestors on the continents where the very civilizations they constructed were themselves conquered by darker skinned races. It would appear that Caucasians regrouped rather in the continent of Europe where they were most geographically isolated and protected. The European exploration and conquest of the New World was, if one interprets literally, the appropriate ancient manuscripts and records of tribal leaders in Mesoamerica, merely a re-conquering of the New World from the darker skinned races that already had conquered the white people living there in previous generations.
So ingrained was this myth among the Aztec and Mayan population that they believed the conquistador Cortez and his army of white, catholic Spaniards was the second coming of Quetzalcoatl or the "Plumed Serpent" described as a tall white man with a beard who taught the darker skinned natives how to farm and live in harmony with the earth. Upon Quetzalcoatl's departure (he arrived according to legend, literally from the heavens around 69 A.D.) he promised he would return again. Ostensibly as well, during this previous era, lighter-skinned natives existed. Note that modern ethnobiologists are slowly coming around to this realization as well but using the cover story of “albinism” as a disease that is prevalent among certain tribes to cover the uncomfortable truth that lighter skinned natives mixed with the darker ones in past eras.
Indeed, the final conquering of the Mayans and Aztecs by the Spaniards led to the discovery of these higher- elevation, lighter-skinned peoples, the last remnants of whom had fled deep into the highlands of the Central and South American jungles, many into caves. Indeed there is a record of these lighter skinned natives all throughout the Americas however they appear to have been mostly genocided just prior to Columbus’s arrival. Of course this runs counter to modern historians and ethnobiologists who simply refuse to acknowledge the existence of these tribes in spite of photographic records of their last remnants even as early as the 1920s. The topic of white genocide has been so thoroughly covered up and made taboo that one cannot help but to imagine the nefarious intentions of those who are involved in the cover-up:
“Besides Columbus, Cortez found white Indians imprisoned in Montezuma's palace in Mexico City, George Vancouver saw them on Vancouver Island in 1792, and commander Stiles of the American Navy claimed to have seen the same group in 1848. Humboldt saw about 100 White Indians in Columbia in 1801. White Indians have been reported among the Mandan tribe along the banks of the Mississippi River, and in one of the first books ever published by a Native American woman, "To The American Indian; Reminiscences of a Yurok Woman" by Lucy Thompson (1916), she devoted an entire chapter of her work titled: "Traditions of the Ancient White People," where she gives vivid descriptions of the indigenous Caucasian tribe called "Wa-gas," who had inhabited the northwest region of California prior to her Yukon people. She describes the Wa-gas as moral and civilized, and says that they taught her people all of their arts and sciences, including the fish traps still in use in the 20th century, and says these Wa-gas were all over the continent.”
It would appear that the Aztec Chief Montezuma believed Cortez was the second coming of Quetzalcoatl and it would appear that he commanded his people not to fight the Spaniard conquistadors - this is the only logical explanation for how quickly the small legion of 450+ conquistadors conquered the Aztec Capital in just a few weeks. Thousands of people a day were being slaughtered at the peak - as if they didn't even bother to fight back. Perhaps their elders felt it was their time to surrender - but why? Could it be that they recalled the ruins were once home to a different, lighter skinned race of higher knowledge? The race that were the true builders of the Mayan and Aztec temples?
MURAL: THE LEGEND OF QUETZALCOATL, PALACIO NACIONAL DE MEXICO, DIEGO RIVERA 1929-30
The simple reality is that the vast majority of Meso-American tribes are mostly illiterate with no written language so what made the Mayans and Aztecs such great masons and builders and have their own language while their neighbours to the north were living in teepees and mud huts? Something doesn't add up here.
THE STATUE HEAD ABOVE IS OF A CAUCASIAN LOOKING MAN (NOT ABORIGINAL AS THEY DO NOT GROW FACIAL HAIR) WITH A PHOENICIAN TUNIC HAT BELIEVED TO HAVE BEEN SCULPTED AROUND ROUGHLY THE THIRD CENTURY BC FOUND NEAR VERACRUZ MEXICO.
The simple fact however is that it is well known (certainly not even well hidden) that skeletons and mummies of Caucasians in the Americas have been found. Example such as the Kennewick Man in Washington State, the Spirit Cave Man in Nevada and Cloud People mummies of the highlands of Peru all bear distinctive Caucasian features and hair. Indeed, the Spaniards claimed to have encountered the last remnants of the cloud people living in the highlands of Peru. They were under constant attack from their darker skinned neighbors while their women, it was told to the Spaniards, were highly prized as wives among the lowlanders and valued for their beauty. A similar pattern exists today were white women are highly sought after by non-whites.
PRE-COLUMBIAN MAYAN WALL-PAINTING IN THE TEMPLE AT CHITZEN-ITZA. THE CAPTION 'DEPICT A SERIES OF RELATING EPISODES CONCERNING A FAIR-SKINNED PEOPLE WITH FLOWING YELLOW HAIR, DEFEATED IN BATTLE AND SUBSEQUENTLY SACRIFICED BY CONVENTIONALLY EQUIPPED BLACK-SKINNED WARRIORS'
Similar mummies to the Cloud People of Peru can be found in Western China near the Chinese Pyramids. The Chinese excavated these Pyramids and neighboring caves looking for their long lost ancestors but alas found...white people. These mummies however (similar to the cloud people of Peru and the Guanches of the Canary Islands) are quite tall and with nordic features. Their conic hats are analogous to "witch hats" worn by Shamans who performed magic rituals. It is possible these were the Shamanic race that offered "celestial advice" or were the wise sages to the founding Emperors of China?
Interestingly enough these mummies often bear the swastika tattoo on their wrists and other regions of their body - this sign appears to be the most ancient one based on sun worship (pagan) which predates Christianity. It also appears in Hopi tradition and is indicative of the "great migration" according to their legend, of the races.
Indeed, the Hopi may have kept the most ancient records of the human races of any group. Their signs and symbols are indicative of migratory patterns and their legend of the origins of their own people are that they emerged from a hole in the earth from whence all races came and dispersed outward - thus the spokes form the primary migratory pattern. Similarly, it should be known that when the Spaniards arrived in the New World they recorded *numerous* different races of different sizes and proportions. In Patagonia (which literally means “giant feet”) their records indicate having run into large giant humans in the 7-10 foot range (apparently quite peaceful and primitive). This brings us to the large giant skeletons that popped up all over the Americas and which it has been told, were captured and shipped away to the vaults of the Smithsonian never to be seen again (strangely however some are on display in museums in South America to this day). Videos online to this day can be found of farmers claiming they had found large skeletons in strange burial mounds on their properties all over parts of the US (particularly northern Midwest) which were generously donated to the Smithsonian only to be hidden and never seen again. The Lenape tribe in particular of the east coast of the US claim they fought their way across the continent from the West Coast having encountered numerous tribes and races of cannibalistic giants they had to kill before arriving and finally settling in the coastal eastern seaboard.
If even a fraction of these stories are true, it indicates that our current understanding of human racial origins are totally wrong and that not only did we not evolve from a single common ancestor but that the races didn't even evolve in their own singular continents. It would appear rather we coevolved across the globe but somehow managed to stay separate and maintain segregated cultures throughout history with not much intermingling. It would also appear that the white races were once dominant but then later were attacked and genocided in various locations throughout history by the other non-white races, ultimately retreating to the highlands or to the stronghold of Europe where they regrouped and repopulated only to make their final conquest of the earth in the 17th through 20th centuries.
But is there evidence to back these claims in the genetic record? It turns out there is. A recent Russian genetic study indicates that Caucasians did NOT, I repeat NOT, evolve from a common African ancestor.
The absence of certain marker genes in Caucasians made the conclusions inescapable - we did not all come from the same ancestor. Further studies on intelligence have shown large discrepancies between the races in terms of average IQ which is not explainable due to environment alone. Other studies indicate large discrepancies in reproductive rates and mate bonding patterns. While it does appear there was a ton of race *mixing*, there is little evidence to suggest that mixing itself led to new races, rather just recombination of older or existing ones. None of this bodes well for the Left and their "one world" theories.
Furthermore, as indicated previously, all supposed "missing link" skeletons, most notably the Pilt-Down Man and "Lucy" (the magic "missing link" mother-whore monkey of mankind) all turned out to be frauds. They took pieces of other animals and some human, monkey and other parts to make a fraudulent unicorn "missing link" for the sole purpose of supporting evolutionary theory as it pertains to humans. In other words they forced a square peg into a round hole. Once these hoaxes were exposed, like all other hoaxes derived by those with a leftist agenda, they were simply forgotten about.
So, are you full yet? Has this long meandering of quixotic facts left you dizzy? It has for me. However it has made one thing painfully clear...The origins of human race are 100% wrong. Not only do we not have a common African Primate ancestors but we don't even have a good record of where our ancestors lived. What does this all mean?
It means that there is *not* "One race - The Human Race". It means we are *not* all “the same". It means we have a lot to learn and a lot to let go of.
But most of all it means we have to absolutely smash Cultural Marxism and its stranglehold on our academic institutions, media and government. We cannot and must not let them dominate the narrative for even one more decade. Its time to recapture the torch of truth and enlighten our fellow brothers and sisters.
Are you with us? Are you inspired? I hope so...
IF YOU ENJOY OUR CONTENT AND WOULD LIKE TO CONTRIBUTE. SIMPLY DONATE THE PRICE OF A PINT, CHEERS.