It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Genetic Genealogy - Scientific Proof that Egyptians are descendants of Annunaki Alien Race?

page: 3
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: FinallyAwake
Great thread thanks 👍

My best friend is a Christian minister (I'm agnostic) and i literally asked him just today (we're both in Africa as I write) "Soooooo if we all descend from Africa, how comes Adam and Eve are white?"
He said "They weren't, that's just what Christians said"
I was like "wtf?? Who are you???" 😐

Biblical Adam and Eve is whatever you imagine them to be.
Genetic Adam and Eve were most likely black.
BTW an interesting aspect to this whole garden of Eden thing, it seemed to stretch from Mesopotamia to the white and Blue Nile as per Biblical lore.


Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden; and from there it divided and became four rivers. The name of the first is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 The gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. The name of the second river is Gihon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. The name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
www.biblegateway.com...
. There's a huge difference between biblical and genetic Adam and Eve. The genetic is the ones that everyone descended from, but not necessarily the ones that everyone started from. The genetic could be the only one that stayed alive. Many people might have gotten confused by your statement.




posted on Jan, 29 2018 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Well Biblical Eve is simply the Bible story, when I said "Genetic" eve , then that's a more science based approach, and when I said modern "Us" I mean ppl who looked and act like us Homo sapien sapien, off course there are lines that goes back before modern us, some living in the same space as us, but not us.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 01:24 AM
link   
This has to be the weirdest interpretation of Y-DNA I have seen...if you have your autosomal DNA also done I suggest uploading it to gedmatch and using some of their calculators. You will get a much more complete idea that way.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: MagnusMaximus
This has to be the weirdest interpretation of Y-DNA I have seen...if you have your autosomal DNA also done I suggest uploading it to gedmatch and using some of their calculators. You will get a much more complete idea that way.


Ydna haplogroup is autosomal, and not familiar like ancestry DNA. I have done autosomal through nat geo, and also ftdna with the Big Y testing, which is the deepest level available. I am on gedmatch also, but I don't see how that would help understand anything ancient, as gedmatch is to find current people with matching SNPs, small sections that show relationships. I honestly don't have much experience with gedmatch, because I am usually just drawing relationships inside of ftdna.

I do admit that these are bizarre interpretations. It would fall apart if my understanding of the nat geo genius matching was incorrect. Here is the assumption part: if it's looking at matches on my male line years ago, I make the assumption that each of the matches are the same male line as me, and so each match on the male line are then connected to each other. If we are discussing a single male line, then we are discussing a single family that goes back in time. That to me is a sound assumption, considering my knowledge of male line inheritance.

The second assumption is looking at the intermediate percentages of a more ancient haplogroup on my male line. If they state that the haplogroup matches 90 percent of an African tribe, then I assume that means 90 percent of the men from that tribe all come from the same male family line as I do. This means that 90 percent of that tribe then match all of the genius matches, because they are all the same male line.

If these two assumptions are incorrect, then my entire theory is flawed. I feel that it's completely correct, and one can draw connections between Bantu and Egyptians, regardless what historians think that they can prove. The writing of ydna is much more accurate over time, than a book of "history" that can be written completely incorrect. We are talking about one of the most ancient form of history. Ydna outlives any oral or written history known to man, so it's novel when people say that there's no connection between people, when over 80 percent of a tribe is a single male line. I don't think people understand how uncommon it is, to have almost zero infiltration of external DNA. I also think that many people fail to understand how mtdna and ydna actually function over millenia. I was lucky, and have gotten to study biotechnology in some college classes.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
Well Biblical Eve is simply the Bible story, when I said "Genetic" eve , then that's a more science based approach, and when I said modern "Us" I mean ppl who looked and act like us Homo sapien sapien, off course there are lines that goes back before modern us, some living in the same space as us, but not us.


You know, even though there's a difference between biblical and genetic eve ...... Genetic eve will still be descendant of biblical eve.

An example if Adam had five sons, and after twenty thousand years every male line had died but a single man, then he could be considered biblical Adam. That's because every current line descends from him, even though he wasn't the first, he still is genetic Adam. It would be neat to find biblical and genetic eve and Adam, and be able to track both of their lineages.



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: ThreeDeuce

originally posted by: Spider879
Well Biblical Eve is simply the Bible story, when I said "Genetic" eve , then that's a more science based approach, and when I said modern "Us" I mean ppl who looked and act like us Homo sapien sapien, off course there are lines that goes back before modern us, some living in the same space as us, but not us.


You know, even though there's a difference between biblical and genetic eve ...... Genetic eve will still be descendant of biblical eve.

An example if Adam had five sons, and after twenty thousand years every male line had died but a single man, then he could be considered biblical Adam. That's because every current line descends from him, even though he wasn't the first, he still is genetic Adam. It would be neat to find biblical and genetic eve and Adam, and be able to track both of their lineages.

Hey TreeDeuces, brah I don't think we can reconcile the two views like that, we are talking hundreds of thousands of yrs not just thousands, the dates alone would violate religious beliefs as we know it, and hard science?? ain't having that conversation.
edit on 30-1-2018 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: ThreeDeuce

originally posted by: Spider879
Well Biblical Eve is simply the Bible story, when I said "Genetic" eve , then that's a more science based approach, and when I said modern "Us" I mean ppl who looked and act like us Homo sapien sapien, off course there are lines that goes back before modern us, some living in the same space as us, but not us.


You know, even though there's a difference between biblical and genetic eve ...... Genetic eve will still be descendant of biblical eve.

An example if Adam had five sons, and after twenty thousand years every male line had died but a single man, then he could be considered biblical Adam. That's because every current line descends from him, even though he wasn't the first, he still is genetic Adam. It would be neat to find biblical and genetic eve and Adam, and be able to track both of their lineages.

Hey TreeDeuces, brah I don't think we can reconcile the two views like that, we are talking hundreds of thousands of yrs not just thousands, the dates alone would violate religious beliefs as we know it, and hard science?? ain't having that conversation.


Bs brah. Nothing in the bible states years. That's just people's opinions based on normal lifespans and trying to track back from the genealogy told in the bible, and you're the one that brought up biblical Adam into the conversation. One can't argue that we descend from one line, because we've tracked the haplogroup. Look at A00 haplogroup. Where the difference in years, is that people do not correctly analyze the long lifes of Noah and his descendants. We know that the bible isn't a scientific account, but haplogroup science is definitely. There are people who try to claim that people are like five thousand years since creation, but I see that as ridiculous. We are much more ancient, and can see the change of our DNA over a hundred thousand years. There are claims that the haplogroups show a common ancestor for everyone 180,000 years ago, but that is not proof of a biblical Adam, just a genetic one. There could have been a thousand males before that time, but 999 died and only a single line survived. We don't have the evidence to make big conclusions about Adam and Eve, but there seems great proof of common ancient ancestors




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join