>I never said it was my belief that O' Rhesus Negative
>are a hybrid/ genetic creation of alien races
No...but I've read theories about it, and I just sort of assumed that anyone on a discussion board like this would at least consider the
possibility. And I'm not saying that it's not the case. I'm just saying it's not the only plausible explanation.
>Isn't it estimated to be around 15% of earths population that has rh-?
...the site I looked at said 7%...but...
>What entire population? Have I missed something?
Well, I'm making some assumptions, but regardless of what the exact percentage is now...prior to 1940 there were ZERO recorded cases of RH- blood,
even though blood typing had been occurring for forty years. So...I see a few possibilities:
1) Prior to WWII RH- blood did not exist. It was somehow introduced during the war.
2) It did exist prior to the war, but in only a very small percentage of the population. Small enough that it was simply "never noticed" during
forty yers of blood typing.
3) RH- has always been around, and in the general population, but was never noticed because the science of blood typing hadn't progressed to a level
of refinement sufficient to look for all relevant factors.
4) It was not present in the majority of the worlds population, but there was some particular racial sub-group somewhere in the world that had
remained isolated until fairly recent history, and presumably didn't start interbreeding with people in the more technological parts of the world
until again, fairly recently.
Two seems implausible to me. Three sounds totally reasonable...but...well...it never occurred to me until just now, so I wasn't considering it
earlier in the thread. Four seems reasonable at first glance, but I was under the impression that RH- people are generally european blonde/red haired
people. Not exactly a group living in isolation.
That leaves 1, which makes it sound like a recent mutation or alteration, and 3...which I'll have to look into some more.
>it was a good read. Very informative.
Thank you.
>Bad mutation??? Not bad.......SPECIAL!!!
>Maybe it's possible that everybody was once rh- and that
>through the generations it mutated into the other blood groups?
Umm...ok, yes. That seems totally reasonable...but... (and anyone please correct me if I'm horribly, totally wrong about all of this) let's try
to clarify a little:
RH+ and RH- are not "blood groups."
A, B, AB and O are.
What the RH factor means, simply, is whether or not someone produces a certain protein. "Positive" meaning yes they do, "negative" meaning no they
don't.
So, someone who has type O blood, may then produce, or fail to produce that protein, giving them either O+ or O- blood accordingly.
A+, A-, B+, B- Etc.
So...yes...I think it's totally reasonable to speculate that "originally" our genes had not "learned" how to produce that protein, and thus,
everyone was originally RH-.
That would make RH- blood not a new thing at all, but rather an evolutionary leftover that simply hasn't quite managed to get filtered into
extinction. That could be.
Actually that makes a lot of sense. That only leaves the question of why it was never noticed until 1940, which again, might break down to
technological limitations, or simply that nobody was looking for that protein. Somebody with RH- blood will still identify as A, B, AB or O, because
they are.
Think of it this way: If you look at me and conclude that I am white....does that tell you anything about what color my eyes are? No. You'd have to
check that too.
Again, I'll have to look into it some more.
[edit on 14-9-2005 by LordBucket]
