Dihybrid Origins and SSSM theories

Greetings all! I came belatedly to your website when I read of Caesar's Messiah on an Amazon ad. in 2014, sending the book to my critical friend Carlos in Sydney (yes, I am a fellow national of Julian Assange). He said that the book was marvellous so I soon obtained it, having at the same time discovered Docherty and McGregor's expose on how Britain started WW1! When I checked the Hebrew/Aramaic derivation of some of the words that Joe Atwill had used in the text they confirmed his readings, so I sent him an email, then another, which contained my discussion with Carlos, who confirmed my readings of the Semitic derivations. Joe emailed back for me to telephone him via Skype but my computer malfunctioned with it so was unable to do so.

In the meantime I began reading those extraordinary articles - 'Manufacturing the Deadhead' and 'I am the Walrus'. Given my medical background, this ultimately brought me into considering the origin of the Sex-Drugs-and-Rock&Roll movement in the 1950s. When in February I listened to Joe's interview about Elvis Presley I did not expect much that was interesting since I have little interest in that rock star, but Joe's revelations about Adorno & Horkheimer's 'The Authoritarian Personality' blew me away. I have since obtained the book itself since I could not believe the quotations Joe gave from the conclusion. The implications are absolutely astounding and much greater and more extreme even than Joe or anyone on this website (or anywhere else I can find) has considered.

As you can guess, my pseudonym partly derives from the Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoon show which I enjoyed as a pre-adolescent in the early 1960s. It also derives from Shakespeare's Messiah where I pondered the evidence on Hamlet there. I well remember watching the BBC's 'I Claudius' series in the 1970s, the scene where the soldier uncovers Claudius from hiding behind a curtain (since he was crippled and could not run), where I thought of the only other incident in literature where this occurs - Hamlet stabbing Polonius, which I well remember writing about in high school.

I post here for the first time to register my shock at the lack of combat between leftist Žižek and conservative rightist Jordan Peterson, revealing how political debate globally has crumbled. As to whether Jordan Peterson is a racist...

https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/transcripts/douglas-murray/

...he merely skirts the issue, leaving Black-White or Gentile-Ashkenazi IQ differences in the "don't know" category.

Time to put some life back into the debate there! Look forward to reading all your replies soon,

Yours faithfully
Claude
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Welcome Claude,

It sounds like you may have a lot of opinions on issues we like to deal with here. And we're glad that you like Joe's Caesar's Messiah, which thesis on the central role of the Flavians informed our name.

As you'll see we discuss many other books of the same vein, like Creating Christ, which discusses the Flavians imperial iconography of the fish and anchor, the common symbol of Christianity (or Chrestianity) before Constantine imposed the cross. On several threads on the forum I have been linking Christianity to its prior Greco-Roman saviors, the divine twins, Castor and Pollux, memorialized when Paul rode a ship of the same name to Rome to bring his brand of Christianity to Rome, at least as the narrative accords it. And I have been working to advance the thesis of Flavio Barbiero's (in his Secret Society of Moses) that the Hasmoneans, at least (I say with the Flavians and other Sabine Romans genes), created the Romanized cult of Mithra and used it just as Freemasonry is today.

Unfortunately, Joe has(?) decided that he is a happier Flavian and not a happy Postflavian, thus continuing to parlay the synthetic (in our POV) Jewish / goyim dialectic. So he is currently hanging out with Catholics and cultural Catholics rather than with us. Jerry and I are working to expose the synthetic dialectic, while this effort makes it uncomfortable for those that like to point their fingers in the circular firing squad. Cui bono? In this regard Jerry and I have coined the SSSM, or the Shepherd, Sheepdog, and Sheep Model of Western Civilization.

As you can guess, my pseudonym partly derives from the Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoon show which I enjoyed as a pre-adolescent in the early 1960s. It also derives from Shakespeare's Messiah where I pondered the evidence on Hamlet there. I well remember watching the BBC's 'I Claudius' series in the 1970s, the scene where the soldier uncovers Claudius from hiding behind a curtain (since he was crippled and could not run), where I thought of the only other incident in literature where this occurs - Hamlet stabbing Polonius, which I well remember writing about in high school.
Yes, I have fond memories of Rocky & Bullwinkle as well.

Speaking of plays and such, have you read Australian Gary Courtney's Et Tu Judas, Then Fall Jesus!? His thesis is that the gospels were first formed ( a first strata of development let's say) from a panegyric play about the military accomplishments of JC, ... Julius Caesar. Julius was, of course, stabbed in Pompey's Theater, and his wax effigy was hung upon a tropaeum, where when Mark Antony displayed the crafted wounds made in the effigy, the Jews of Rome wailed the loudest, as Julius was one of their messiahs, like Cyrus of Persian.

I post here for the first time to register my shock at the lack of combat between leftist Žižek and conservative rightist Jordan Peterson, revealing how political debate globally has crumbled. As to whether Jordan Peterson is a racist...
It appears to me that debate is crumbling, because the passions are turning militant, and thus why talk? Those attempting to do this, then might be tempted to turn down the heat as with this 'debate'. I take Peterson's word that he is an old school Liberal (and thus a modern conservative of the prior generation, not a Caesaro-Trumpian). That neurotic white Proud Boys and such go marching around America, Romantically chanting "Blood and Soil" carrying Communist Chinese made Polynesian tiki-torches, is not on him.

https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/transcripts/douglas-murray/

...he merely skirts the issue, leaving Black-White or Gentile-Ashkenazi IQ differences in the "don't know" category.
I put those more in the "don't care" category from my POV. Jerry believes that the Ashkenazi Slavo-Turks (aka Gomers, aka Khazars) might have a higher IQ, merely from their 1,000+ years of being the de jure institutional buffer class of Western Civilization. Not only would being 'restricted' to professional and mercantile occupations, relative to feudal serf 'occupation', give advanced pressure on genes, but to epigenetic expression.

And, have you seen the late Nicholas DeVere's genetic and biochemical claims in his The Dragon Legacy (aka From Transylvania to Tunbridge Wells)? Based upon DeVere's amazing claims for his clan, I would guess that, if true, the DeVeres might be the fabled Ashina (and more). DeVere's claims dovetail rather well with the theory and metanarrative that Jerry and I have been working on prior to discovering DeVere.

Regards, r
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Jerry believes that the Ashkenazi Slavo-Turks (aka Gomers, aka Khazars) might have a higher IQ, merely from their 1,000+ years of being the de jure institutional buffer class of Western Civilization.
In the past I've been sympathetic to such claims. But, scientific studies capable of separating genetic effects from cultural effects are devilishly difficult to do. And, it's hard to find anyone who studies or writes about this topic that doesn't have an 'agenda', either directly or via their funding source. And, any differences that might have existed in the past are being rapidly erased by assimilation and intermarriage anyhow. So I'm putting this in the "don't know and don't care" category.

Joe's revelations about Adorno & Horkheimer's 'The Authoritarian Personality' blew me away. I have since obtained the book itself since I could not believe the quotations Joe gave from the conclusion. The implications are absolutely astounding and much greater and more extreme even than Joe or anyone on this website (or anywhere else I can find) has considered.
Joe and I had talked about this topic back when we were doing podcasts here, and I was inclined to take the opposite position. That is, that Adorno & Horkheimer were a couple of very reasonable guys. I'm not buying the idea that "the Academic Left" is responsible for victimizing Jordan Peterson, Slavoj Žižek or anybody else. So I'm curious what Joe has been saying lately, and what you've found.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
In the past I've been sympathetic to such claims. But, scientific studies capable of separating genetic effects from cultural effects are devilishly difficult to do. And, it's hard to find anyone who studies or writes about this topic that doesn't have an 'agenda', either directly or via their funding source. And, any differences that might have existed in the past are being rapidly erased by assimilation and intermarriage anyhow. So I'm putting this in the "don't know and don't care" category.
Ha, I trapped you, almost troll like. :)

If we are to believe Hosea 1:1, then the Gomers (the non-Semitic, supposed direct ancestors of the Ashkenazim) make it over 2,500 years, not 1000+ years. We can be pretty sure that the Assyrians forced the emigration of the OG Israelites (aka cultural Canaanite refuseniks) at least, because the Assyrians said so, separately from the Bible. And maybe there's something in the matzo ball soup? Or ... not in the soup?

But yes, I think that narrative, and control of the same, is a more important factor. And as we've discovered the master narrative also provides the org chart and script for the unfolding of Western Civilization. Shepherds, Sheepdogs, and Sheep.
Joe and I had talked about this topic back when we were doing podcasts here, and I was inclined to take the opposite position. That is, that Adorno & Horkheimer were a couple of very reasonable guys. I'm not buying the idea that "the Academic Left" is responsible for victimizing Jordan Peterson, Slavoj Žižek or anybody else. So I'm curious what Joe has been saying lately, and what you've found.
Yes, I'm interested in finding out more.

As far as Peterson's Rightness versus Leftness, as I said earlier, and far as I can tell, he claims an OG Liberal bent. Meaning his vibe is somewhat like that of an American 'patriot' of the Revolutionary period, albeit that he is a Canadian. But, he wants to put todays' untraditional people back in their Traditional cultural boxes, as Freedom has constraints. Like "Yankee Doodle put a feather in his cap and called it macaroni".

Here is where Peterson and similar seem a little incoherent and schizo, as for me it was the original Liberalism that ultimately led to the degradation of traditional monarchy. The latter which has most always been supported by Religion, and specifically such as the Roman Catholic Church. Traditional Catholics, have thus consistently hated Liberalism, and modernity, and such as all forms of democracy.

For better or worse, that recent Democracy has always been co-opted, but the sheep have started to internalize the rhetoric too much, like the Jewish Zealots of yore did, and soon someone must come and put the surviving sheep back in their pens. According to the narrative, that is.
 
Thank you both for your understanding replies. I hope I can get the quotation system working properly.
... scientific studies capable of separating genetic effects from cultural effects are devilishly difficult to do. And, it's hard to find anyone who studies or writes about this topic that doesn't have an 'agenda', either directly or via their funding source. And, any differences that might have existed in the past are being rapidly erased by assimilation and intermarriage anyhow. So I'm putting this in the "don't know and don't care" category.
I am eager to reply, but Richard's reply to you has the term "OG" in it, the meaning of which is still unclear to me. I suspect it means "Older Generation" but I will await your clarification here.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I am eager to reply, but Richard's reply to you has the term "OG" in it, the meaning of which is still unclear to me. I suspect it means "Older Generation" but I will await your clarification here.
'OG' is street slang for 'Original Gangster', or more loosely: just 'original' or 'old school'.
 
Last edited:
Dear Richard,

Thank you for the surprising meaning for 'OG'! I had already ordered Creating Christ based on what I saw here, but you really caught me out with Et Tu Judas, since I was completely unaware of Courtney - especially as you said he is Australian! I have now ordered his book too!

I am very happy for Joe to be investigating 'cultural Catholics' - real Catholics would rather use him as fuel for the Burning Man, if they could lure him in - as his work on exposing Freemasonry exposed a real blind spot in my own experience. Growing up as an Anglican, I had thought the Freemasons a generally harmless and silly 'male bonding' group - as portrayed in the Loyal Order of Water Buffaloes (Fred Flintstone) and the Stonecutters (Simpsons). Freemasonry is originally a Protestant perversion, but quickly spread among nominal Catholics (e.g. Voltaire, Mozart). My grandfather, an Anglican minister, had joined the Freemasons but soon left in disgust because he found them to be essentially a drinking society (i.e. booze).

Nevertheless, despite Catholicism's manifold perversions - and you have probably heard about Cardinal Pell's conviction for child abuse in Australia - it does have peculiar and good features arising from its Roman origin. The first of these is its universalism, much stronger than that of exclusivistic Protestantism, (Prots so much more prone to political subserviency and abuse, like Islam too), and the second is its restricted democracy, able to function effectively in the hierarchical structure because celibacy ensured that would-be Popes could not pass on Church wealth and power to their children!

Your classification of Shepherds, sheepdogs and sheep as the three grades of people in Western Civilization is a correctly directed escape from the Peterson-Žižek impasse. What is now required is a deeper understanding of human differences - especially when one labels them Orwellianly as pigs, dogs and sheep, which is why I highlight the IQ difference question. Joe can look for DNA on all these people - and I think he's right that he'll find most of the elites related to one another - but I have to present deeper evidence on this question that demonstrates we have evidence enough to resolve the situation.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Hello Claude,

Joe can look for DNA on all these people - and I think he's right that he'll find most of the elites related to one another - but I have to present deeper evidence on this question that demonstrates we have evidence enough to resolve the situation.
Have you seen my essay on this topic, here: https://postflaviana.org/elite-sub-species/

Also Michael Hart's "Understanding Human History", free download here:

https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/hart_-_understanding_human_history-1.pdf
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Your classification of Shepherds, sheepdogs and sheep as the three grades of people in Western Civilization is a correctly directed escape from the Peterson-Žižek impasse.
We should have Jerry fork this discussion onto a new or different thread.

I am very happy for Joe to be investigating 'cultural Catholics' - real Catholics would rather use him as fuel for the Burning Man, if they could lure him in - as his work on exposing Freemasonry exposed a real blind spot in my own experience. Growing up as an Anglican, I had thought the Freemasons a generally harmless and silly 'male bonding' group - as portrayed in the Loyal Order of Water Buffaloes (Fred Flintstone) and the Stonecutters (Simpsons). Freemasonry is originally a Protestant perversion, but quickly spread among nominal Catholics (e.g. Voltaire, Mozart).
Viewing Freemasonry as such as a "Protestant perversion" is very common, a profitably divisive conceit especially with those of a Catholic mindset. But, it is much more than that. It is the inner, esoteric church, of which form the key 'elders' of the exoteric Church, Protestant or Catholic. And having such a structure allows the expedient freedom to engage in 'extracurricular' political efforts that likely would be frowned upon by the wider congregation and society. For example, think the Boston Tea Party, Freemasons disguised as native Americans.

My problem with Joe is that he indulges in encouraging this conceit, despite having been educated otherwise. He even discussed in CM that Jesus's father is accorded as a tekton, as a mason rather than as a mundane carpenter. And, of course, fictive Jesus, like John the Baptist, had their own secret society (of which Jesus, the Nazarite, would not allow Greek pigs into). The real Flavians seem also to be members of a Pythagorean based secret society, based upon the work of archaeologist John Bartram, and linking the fish and anchor symbolism (from Creating Christ) to the same via such as David Fideler's brilliant work, Jesus Christ, Sun of God. (This ties us strongly into Castor and Pollux as well, and back again to the Egyptians, e.g. the Aten).

Vespasian and his brother were Roman officers in Britain, serving under emperor Claudius, at the time that a unique Vesica Piscus shrine was built in the very center of the Dewa Fortress, now under a parking lot in the city of Chester, England. The Vesica Piscus is a key solar feature of Pythagorean sacred geometry, and the real basis of the Christian 'fish' symbol. See Fideler, who explains the math of such Pythagorean numbers in the Gospels.

The inner church is not quite so 'universal' or (c)atholic, but it can indeed be (C)atholic.

The Catholic Church has its variants, such as the Knights of Columbus and the 'OG' Knights of Malta (formerly the Knights Hospitaller and Knights Templar). The Vatican sits atop a Mithraic mithraeum, as do many more Catholic churches in Rome and Europe.

There are some researchers that link Freemasonry back to the Templars. Flavio Barbiero links it back to the cult of Mithra, via the Hasmoneans. And from them back to the Egyptians, hence the Masonic heavy usage of Egyptian (as well as others) symbols is more than a conceit. We believe that such as Kings David and Solomon are cryptic references to actual Egyptian pharaohs (see the works of Ralph Ellis).

My grandfather, an Anglican minister, had joined the Freemasons but soon left in disgust because he found them to be essentially a drinking society (i.e. booze).
Likely, their modus operandi changes from period to period based upon the circumstances. As such, today's "drinking society" appearance allows them to still profile new members as to what they may be useful for, just with a different 'filter', one that serves for plausible deniability. Prior to be a "drinking society", it was just a "talking society". You could talk about things like how to manage rebellious slaves, or how to subvert democracy, or ...

My mother told me that when my Dad and her were in Presbyterian seminary that they were told the Anglicans were virtual Catholics. Indeed, most of the denominational High Church Protestants are melding back into the Mother Church. However, the Presbyterians just seem to be getting greyer, as far as I can tell. Per my analysis of Futurist eschatology, the Low Church Protestants are becoming the typological equivalents of the Zealot Jews of Biblical Times. All based upon Shepherding, one of the key motifs of JudeoChristianity, and coming from the pharaohs' crook and flail.

Nevertheless, despite Catholicism's manifold perversions - and you have probably heard about Cardinal Pell's conviction for child abuse in Australia - it does have peculiar and good features arising from its Roman origin. The first of these is its universalism, much stronger than that of exclusivistic Protestantism, (Prots so much more prone to political subserviency and abuse, like Islam too), and the second is its restricted democracy, able to function effectively in the hierarchical structure because celibacy ensured that would-be Popes could not pass on Church wealth and power to their children!
Maybe you behave inversely "down under"? I have never known any so politically subservient that Catholics, with their obedience of the so-called Respected Man, and thus the hierarchy of perversion. Cardinal Pell is hardly unique in this regard. Democracy in Catholicism? Not in Traditional Catholicism, its for strict, unimpeded Monarchy.

I don't understand your association of celibacy and Church property with secular governance, whether democracy or monarchy.

I do understand what you're saying about the 'positive' aspects of OG Rome, and one can see, from reading the accounts, how the Romans of the day, even the plebeians, were very proud and patriotic about the Republic and then the imperium. However, I remember distinctly the zeitgeist of my Christian youth that Christians were so proud to have conquered the evil pagan empire and such as its brutal exposure of unwanted babies. (However, don't speak too loudly about the slavery business, depending on where you are though). Otherwise, the Western world, is just OG Rome by a different name, the USA being the tip of its militant spear.

And, BTW, (exoteric) Catholics are just as proud today that Christianity destroyed the evil empire, so its not a Protestant thing. But now you'll find 'enlightened' Catholic readers of Carotta's Jesus was Caesar performing the old rituals in honor of Julius now.

What is now required is a deeper understanding of human differences - especially when one labels them Orwellianly as pigs, dogs and sheep, which is why I highlight the IQ difference question.
As I alluded to before, the Bible uses the Shepherd metaphor. So is it Orwellian? I would say so.

Joe can look for DNA on all these people - and I think he's right that he'll find most of the elites related to one another - but I have to present deeper evidence on this question that demonstrates we have evidence enough to resolve the situation.
One doesn't need DNA to understand that the Euro-royals are all highly inbred, and not related to the OG serfer (not surfer) classes below the gentry. From our Old Testament analysis series, one can see the org chart of Western society, and this seems consistent with DeVere's claim that his red-headed, green eyed Arya clan were the real players of the Bible, and those red headed pharaohs (of the 18th and 19th Dynasties) as well. To me then, it seems that Esau did indeed reclaim his inheritance, about 2,000 years ago.

r
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Democracy in Catholicism? Not in Traditional Catholicism, its for strict, unimpeded Monarchy.
I thought the system was that royal and noble families sent their 2nd and 3rd sons to the church, where they became priests, bishops, cardinals & so forth. Then the Cardinals would democratically elect a Pope, who became effectively the monarch of the church for life. So there was an element of democracy or meritocracy, and it wasn't automatic that the King's 2nd son would become Pope.

All I know about this, came from watching the HBO series 'Young Pope'. So obviously I could be completely misinformed.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Oh, THAT democracy. And the curious Curia.

This is the operations of the corporation, the family business. The 'family' being the Sabine tribe. I guess its a democracy in the sense that a private (not public) corporation board is a democracy. But not in a democracy of the people, the demos.

This is somewhat like thinking that the Magna Carta has something to do with the 'people'. It had to do with the rights of the nobility versus the king. But, all is vanity indeed.
 
Dear Jerry,

I was having a look at your essay on elite 'subspeciation' before I joined. The question of speciation is a difficult one since new species arise in different ways. Horses and donkeys are genetically separate but the sterile hybrid we call a mule is valuable for humans but useless at reproduction. Unfortunately you quote now obsolete material e.g. Templeton's work from 2001. The best person on this issue today is Svante Pääbo. There is dispute over human-chimp divergence most authors holding to 5m years or less. The true answer is at least 10 million years. The first humans, archaic humans (with large brow-ridges) migrated from Africa about 1.9m years ago. Today, in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) this is represented by the Denisovan lineage which differs from modern human and from Neanderthal mtDNA by about 380 mutations. This reveals the female lineage time of divergence, this being roughly 2m years ago. Neanderthal-modern mtDNA differs by about 180 mutations, giving a divergence time of about 8-900,000 years ago. The Denisovan divergence time fits with the fossil record as human-chimp mtDNA divergence is about 1,650 base-pairs.

You can see my own prediction of this in 1995 in the journal Human Evolution 10:2, 141-151 titled "A Theory of Dihybrid Origins for non-African Human Races". My concern arose originally from the Berkeley African Eve studies of Allan C. Wilson which claimed that all human mtDNA came from an African Eve only 200,000 years ago - this being only 400,000 years if one readjusted for the human-chimp divergence. Yet their Preliminary Report from 1982 showed that one Australian Aboriginal mtDNA diverged markedly from all the others tested, showing 36 differences from another mtDNA despite only 7% of the mtDNA genome being tested. A Denisovan subjected to this study would show 380 x 7/100 = 27 differences, which would equal the AVERAGE mtDNA difference between this Aboriginal mtDNA and all the other samples, including two other Australian Aborigines. However, the researchers have forgotten about this, ignoring Australian mtDNA until the Denisovan fossil discovery showed unexpected links to New Guinean mtDNA. (Stay tune for some action IF I can get Milford Wolpoff interested!)

That Denisovans did not die out is shown by the high-altitude survival haemoglobin found in Tibetans - it comes from Denisovan DNA! So how can one work IQ genes into all this?

When I look at Hart's History - or The Bell Curve - I find only mathematical correlations, which, if positive IQ genes (I.e. those selected for by evolutionary natural selection) are to be proven, have to have a physical genetic correlate e.g. certain strings of DNA and certain mutation differences between ethnic groups that correlate meaningfully with IQ differences proven statistically. Such investigations have not even been attempted - merely deduced in the hope that a genetic mechanism would eventually be found.

One significant place where IQ genes have been found (though not positive IQ genes) is in X-linked mental retardation syndromes, including early reports of tuberous sclerosis, but which diagnosis has now been subsumed in non-X syndromes.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 
Last edited:
We should have Jerry fork this discussion onto a new or different thread.
That sounds very sensible.
One doesn't need DNA to understand that the Euro-royals are all highly inbred, and not related to the OG serfer (not surfer) classes below the gentry. From our Old Testament analysis series, one can see the org chart of Western society, and this seems consistent with DeVere's claim that his red-headed, green eyed Arya clan were the real players of the Bible, and those red headed pharaohs (of the 18th and 19th Dynasties) as well. To me then, it seems that Esau did indeed reclaim his inheritance, about 2,000 years ago.

r
Indeed - at least up to DeVere, who, as I quickly found on Google, is a latter-day epigone of Aleister Crowley (quel horreur)!

That you touched on red-headed green eyed people amazed me as my first girl friend had these characteristics - but I have never met a person since who had both! Green eyes are part-way to blue eyes with the latter's lack of pigment, these deriving from Neanderthals (unlike blond hair which came later from selection due to calcium malnutrition such that even Houston Stewart Chamberlain commented that the German nobility were darker colored than the peasantry), hence their presence in mountainous northern India e.g. Kashmir. The Aryans however are the gigantic tribe that inhabited the Indus-Sarasvati civilization and would rarely have red-hair or green eyes.

Red hair is different again in that it is found in dark-skinned people too, notably Malcolm X, who garnered the name 'Detroit Red' while working on the railways. In ancient human remains melanin readily decays, leaving the red porphyrin pigment behind, giving rise to the common belief that the ancients were all red-haired! Linking these characteristics to postulated positive IQ genes is yet another layer of difficulty!

Yours faithfully
Claude
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
That sounds very sensible.
And now you've created a second topic, on the DNA of the Eloi. It should go here: https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?forums/the-eloi-the-morlocks.12/

You can copy it there and then delete the original post here. Jerry has forked all of this now.

In any case, I would like you to comment on the work of Dr. Eugene McCarthy, who asserts that humans (except me, of course :)) are essentially what I term "chimpigs" via cross-species breeding and backbreeding. Either at the link I provided above, and/or at: https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/kinsey-sexual-ethics-and-evolution.2040/#post-5590

McCarthy's work is at: Macroevolution.net
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
And now you've created a second topic, on the DNA of the Eloi.
Hmm... Claude mentioned Black-White and Gentile-Ashkenazi IQ differences in his very first post, and it's been a running theme since then. So for now I'm just creating a new thread for the discussion, and let's see if it diverges further.

When I look at Hart's History - or The Bell Curve - I find only mathematical correlations, which, if positive IQ genes (I.e. those selected for by evolutionary natural selection) are to be proven, have to have a physical genetic correlate e.g. certain strings of DNA and certain mutation differences between ethnic groups that correlate meaningfully with IQ differences proven statistically. Such investigations have not even been attempted - merely deduced in the hope that a genetic mechanism would eventually be found.
It seems to me that Hart's view of history could be equally valid if his narrative was based entirely on cultural and technological developments occurring in various human populations because of diverse environmental pressures. Maybe there's no need for underlying genetic IQ differences between ethnic groups.

If the proto-Indo-Europeans were the first to develop metallurgy, the wheel & domestic horses, and integrate those into their culture, perhaps that's sufficient to explain their success.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Indeed - at least up to DeVere, who, as I quickly found on Google, is a latter-day epigone of Aleister Crowley (quel horreur)!
A DeVere, and a Stanley, are also among those accorded as candidates for alternate pens of Shakespeare's works. The latter family is also the first known employer of Shakespeare in the theatrical biz.

That you touched on red-headed green eyed people amazed me as my first girl friend had these characteristics - but I have never met a person since who had both! Green eyes are part-way to blue eyes with the latter's lack of pigment, these deriving from Neanderthals (unlike blond hair which came later from selection due to calcium malnutrition such that even Houston Stewart Chamberlain commented that the German nobility were darker colored than the peasantry), hence their presence in mountainous northern India e.g. Kashmir. The Aryans however are the gigantic tribe that inhabited the Indus-Sarasvati civilization and would rarely have red-hair or green eyes.

Red hair is different again in that it is found in dark-skinned people too, notably Malcolm X, who garnered the name 'Detroit Red' while working on the railways. In ancient human remains melanin readily decays, leaving the red porphyrin pigment behind, giving rise to the common belief that the ancients were all red-haired! Linking these characteristics to postulated positive IQ genes is yet another layer of difficulty!
[I decided that this is a good opportunity to summarize the highlights of various research threads that I've scattered across this forum. - rs. Edits made 4/26/19]

DeVere spends a lot of time on his red-headed, green-eyedness, and that his specific Norman clan is exclusively inbred (rather like the pharaohs). That this inbreeding was intended to maintain what he claims is genetically informed, biochemical related, neurological properties that deliver what can be described as shamanic qualities, without the psychotropics.

Maybe all BS? I could see later nobles and royalty dying their hair, or using wigs, in order to employ this ruse to garner credibility for their 'worthiness'. It has been discovered that Alexander the Great's mother was depicted in a tomb painting with red hair, so maybe this as well? We know that Donald Trump dyes his hair orange, likely to con the evangelicals that he is indeed a modern day Nazarite like Samson. But, if one starts with real red hair, then their hair thousands of years later will be ... red, right?

However, there is an historical fabric of metanarrative that seems to support DeVere's outrageous claims, which includes the concept of cuckolding one's way into power, by arms, by 'inviting' genial genitalia, or ... not so much.

Among other things, these Normans (such as DeVere) 'found their way' into England exactly one millennia after the apocalyptic Second Coming in Jerusalem in 70 CE, (1066 + the ubiquitous 3.5 years of Revelation, and a thousand years for Christ to rule and a thousand years for Satan, ..., and it's all documented in the Domesday (Doomsday) Book). While the Norman nobles spoke French for centuries, they eventually dropped this for the Anglo-Saxon tongue. These Normans were tightly connected to the Knights Templar, who went grousing around Jerusalem, supposedly for items related to the events of 1,000 years prior. These Jerusalem-ophiles also seemed to have a strange penchant for precisely reproducing imperial Roman architecture, which my thesis of the False Dialectic of Western Civilization accommodates BTW.

Getting back red hair, as I discuss in the OT series, it is stated that Esau had red hair, but strangely twin brother Jacob's hair coloring is not mentioned at all. It is stated that Esau was the father of Edom, which means 'red'. The principle city of Edom was Petra, a powerful cosmopolitan trading city, and the Herodians are accorded as being Idumaeans, or Edomites. The Herodians, like the Hasmoneans (Josephus), were mixed up with the Flavians, and even earlier, from the Book of (x?)Maccabees they tell the story of going to Rome to invite them in to kick out the Greeks. (Josephus follows suit and goes to Rome where he comes back and helps start the apocalyptic Jewish War, while saying he warned everyone not to do this).

It is Jacob's family where the 'org chart' for Western Civilization comes from, IMHO. Via Joseph, at least, they are linked to the pharaohs, the Abrahamic blessing stolen from Esau, is delivered to Ephraim. While Judah and his descendants must serve Joseph, via Ephraim, until the two (Egyptian) tribal sticks become one.

You mentioned the IVC, and here the scholar Melatti Shendge, in her The Language of the Harappans disputes the Aryan nature of the IVC. That the Aryan Brahmin class were late invaders there, as explicit in the Vedas. And I say that the manner is much akin to the Norman Conquest, and as others claim, that the Hyksos (Shepherd Kings - ignoring nomadic Semitic tribes under them) were included in the genetic origin of the famous 18th dynasty, not as Ahmose I stated - that he kicked the Hyksos out. We then have the issue of Amenhotep III's unique marriage to a Mittani princess (compared to all his other foreign wives). The Mittani are generally of the same area as the asserted starting point for Abraham, Harran and Urfa/Edessa.

Harran is also famous for being home of the star watchers, the Sabeans, and Abraham's armed retinue of 318 were accorded as the tsabians. Urfa was also a traditional trading outpost for older Ur (of the Chaldees), and one can see possible thread of connection between the Kassites that took over Sumeria with being the kasatriya warrior caste, of the (narrow cast) 'Arya'. Shendge's wider thesis is that the 'black-headed' peoples of Mesopotamia were much the same as the common people of the IVC, generally Semitic. Then came Indra.

Sweeney thinks that the Mittani are one and the same as the Medes. Consistent with DeVere's thesis, Herodotus described the foundational core of the Medes as being a clan of priests, ala shamen, the OG Magi I believe. It was these Medes that launched Cyrus on his imperial career, the first of the Persian emperors, and the messiah of the Jews.

Moving north from the IVC, we get to the odd burial grounds (in western China) of a princess, wearing a fine Scottish tartan and with 'red-hair' and as far I remember, being identified as 'Caucasian'. These regions are generally that accorded to the Ashina that ruled over other peoples, ala DeVere's claim, and as well, the Royal Saka Scythians. The Ashkenazi Khazars were told by their king that they must convert to Judaism, and here might we wonder if the Khazar nobility were the Ashina? Similarly, one finds Hungarian / Scythian heraldry mixed into that of England's, e.g. the white stag. Geoffrey Ashe discusses similar dovetailing data in his Dawn Before the Dawn, with such as the literal, geographical arc of the "7 Mystique", extending back towards the Altai Mountains of Asia.

r
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Harran is also famous for being home of the star watchers, the Sabeans, and Abraham's armed retinue of 318 were accorded as the tsabians. Urfa was also a traditional trading outpost for older Ur (of the Chaldees), and one can see possible thread of connection between the Kassites that took over Sumeria with being the kasatriya warrior caste, of the (narrow cast) 'Arya'. Shendge's wider thesis is that the 'black-headed' peoples of Mesopotamia were much the same as the common people of the IVC, generally Semitic. Then came Indra.
I should add here, and in regards to the "7 Mystique" that one of the many names for the Abrahamic god is Lord Sabaoth, the lord of (armed) hosts.

The number '7' is accorded as the prefixes 'sept' and 'sab', as well as the spelling 'seven' which has its 'v' cognate with 'b'. The Sabbath is the 7th day. It is the fabled number of Wisdom. It also forms the word 'saber', a duality of wisdom (to know) and militance, with the 'saber' as a sword. In the Sumerian language, 'saba' means 'shepherd'.

One might be tempted to see a problem with my discussion of a priestly shamanic elite while simultaneously talking about a group of warriors. However, we can keep in mind here that Julius Caesar, at least be his own account (or his ghost writer's) that he was an amazing general and he was the literal Pontifex Maximus of Rome at the time. He was the pagan pope. Josephus Flavius also accorded himself in such high dual regard.

I should also add that Shendge's framing of the Arya invasion of the IVC, during the IVC's literal cataclysmic collapse, evokes the subsequent millennial transitions, with it leaving the record on the ground of the change in the courses of great rivers. Those rivers just happening to match the names of Abraham, Sarah, and Haggar in Genesis. In the subsequent 'millennium' we find the collapse of the Bronze Age, marked culturally by the Trojan War. This gave us the Greco-Roman (Homeric) bible and its focus of the egg-born Castor and Pollux, and it also gave us the legends of the fabled Judaic and Israelite kings (thanks to Trumpian chaos agents like Samson). All just disguised Egyptians or Egyptian puppets, the Egyptians also being the only survivors of the collapse of the Late Bronze Age period.
 
Top