EZEKIEL

 

and YHWH’s

 

 Judgment

 

 

for the

 

Good News

 

PEOPLE

 

 

 

VOLUME VIII

 

Man

 

 

EZEKIEL and YHWH’s

 

 

Judgment for the

 

 

 Good News People

 

 

 

 

Volume VIII--Man

 

 

 

 

 

by

 

an unworthy servant

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you shall know the truth,

 

and the truth will make you free.

 

(John 8:32)

 

 

Common Law Copyright, 2003, 2005 & 2010 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho.  The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States.  Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.Age-end.Com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 

 

 

Volume VIII--Man

 

 

CHAPTER                                                                              PAGE

 

 

      -                  Cover Page                                                                                                         1

 

      -                  Title Page                                                                                                             2

 

      -                  Contents                                                                                                              3

 

      -                  Publisher’s Preface                                                                                           5

 

 

Part X--The Race Question 

 

      107             Evolutionary Problems I                                                                                    6

 

      108             Evolutionary Problems II                                                                                 21

 

      109             Evolutionary Problems III                                                                                30

 

      110             Evolutionary Problems IV                                                                               45

 

      111             Evolutionary Problems V                                                                                62

 

      112             Creation in the Word                                                                                       75

 

      113             More Racial Alterations                                                                                   90

 

      114             Answers in Blood Types I                                                                             103

 

      115             Answers in Blood Types II                                                                            116

 

      116             Acts 17:26 Concluded                                                                                   122

 

      117             Answers in the Torah I                                                                                  127

 

      118             Answers in the Torah II                                                                                 143

 

 

Part Y--More on Race

 

      119             Demographics, the Flood & Noah’s Ark                                                     156

 

      120             Post-Flood Demographics                                                                            164

SHEERIT YISRAEL

PO Box 473

Calder, Idaho 83808, USA

 

 

Publisher’s Preface

 

Greetings!  The following presentation is volume eight of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.Age-end.com web site. 

 

This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world.  In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one. 

 

Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material.  It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message! 

 

The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1.  It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins:  left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers). 

                                                                                     

For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope. 

 

With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers.  May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him.  Shalom (peace) to you and yours! 

 

an unworthy servant, Hanukkah 2003 CE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 107--Evolutionary Problems I

 

 

Maoz Israel

 

The Jun 2003 “Maoz Israel Report” (p. 1), as published by the Maoz Israel Messianic Jewish group of Tel Aviv, Israel, said:  “There are four elements that define a people:  language, religion, culture and cuisine.”  Admittedly, these four qualities are important.  But there is still one more element missed by Maoz Israel which is of far greater importance in defining a people.  It is race, as will be addressed in comments to follow. 

 

 

Science on Race 

 

In truth, perhaps one of the most important subjects of all time facing so-called humanity (at least, for worldly unconverted people, who do not turn to the Hebrew Scriptures to establish righteousness and right living) is the question of race and racial origins of people at large. 

 

Historically, there were times when some scientists and so-called scholars broached this issue.  But no one can argue with the reality that has come into play in the post WWII era when almost no one will even utter the word “race.”  The world’s peoples have been so mesmerized and zombiized on this subject that it is impossible to have any discussion about it whatsoever in any sense. 

 

Generally, when one says the word “race,” in whatever context, the immediate reaction from most modern peoples, and particularly from most modern Americans and Christian Westerners (who are the most zombiized of all), is absolute hostility and the uttering of words about racists, White supremacists, etc. 

 

Of course, the so-called scientific world is about as locked in confusion and misunderstanding as is true with the rest of so-called humanity.  In some respects, the alleged scholars and brains of the land are the worst people of all in addressing the subject of race and certainly in the Scriptural context. 

 

Yet, the Hebrew writings defining righteousness have much material on this theme which no one seems interested in, though it is crucial information that even underlies the entire New Testament and the alleged “great commission” which Christians like to quote and preach about so often (in order to raise more and more money from the dumb sheep in order to finance ever more glorious worldwide missionary campaigns--after all, money is the name of the game). 

 

While it probably is easy to appreciate that secular scientists (who completely reject the Hebrew Scriptures and the idea of A Great CREATOR) would foster and promote this ridiculous environment of ignorance and confusion, one must pause and wonder why Christian and Jewish scholars at the various “Bible colleges” and religious teaching centers would be just as ignorant and confused. 

 

Therefore, it seems that in the real world, everybody is lost on this subject.  And generally, people refuse to even address it in any aspect--Scriptural, secular or whatever.  It has become the greatest taboo subject, perhaps of all time.  What a tragedy this is for people searching for truth (because they must inevitably go out of their way to even approach a discussion on the truth about race). 

 

 

The March to World Government 

 

Part of the dilemma is that the world is largely under Satanic control right now, and it is marching full time to world government.  Anything that can impede on this march to world government has come under enormous Satanic opposition.  This influence affects everybody in the general society.  It is a rare few people who can avoid this powerful spiritual influence (either directly or indirectly). 

 

Obviously, in order to have a one world state governed by a one world rulership system, the question of race and how people interplay has fantastic implications.  Probably, it is this reality which has necessitated the extreme push by Satanic and demonic powers to influence all of so-called humanity in a certain adverse direction on this subject. 

 

In this push, no one has been purposely left out.  True, there are a few students of truth who have had brains and strength enough to not buy into the prevailing Satanic teachings.  Some of these persons probably are protected by YHWH and influenced greatly by His Spirit of Truth (in the vein of being in the election, as discussed in previous chapters).  But there aren’t many persons around in this category.   

 

Subsequent chapters herein will discuss the motion for world government and the establishment of world social “gods” which are promoted to all of the world’s people by all facets of global power and influence.  The subject of race fits precisely into this classification (as will be covered in the later chapters).  

 

 

The Official Position 

 

Consequently, Satanic powers that invented and promoted the stupid theories of evolution and the stupid evolutionary development of man have obviously played a key role in the current scientific thinking on race, now believed by perhaps all of society (other than the few exceptions, cited above, as possibly being protected or promoted by YHWH). 

 

This all of society perspective includes almost all Christian and Jewish scholars and brains at the supposed scientific levels of religious teaching and scholarship.   Thus, virtually everybody has bought into the Satanic approach--including local religious pastors, priests, elders, teachers, and so forth.  

 

Hence, the theology of Satanic evolution has designed, established, and defined the modern concepts of race.  The reason for this development and motion is manifestly a furtherance of the New World Order which is quickly developing on the global scene, right now! 

 

 

The Groundwork 

 

“The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia” (p. 702) lays the groundwork for the present state of ignorance and confusion by offering a small paragraph of a little over one inch which discusses “race” (perhaps one of the most profoundly important themes of all time and it receives almost no space from Columbia). 

 

This encyclopedia is not much different from the others.  Virtually all modern encyclopedias and dictionaries have little to say on this issue.  Again, race is the taboo subject for people today.  In historic times, books of knowledge and learning did broach this theme--but not today. 

 

The Columbia position (p. 702) on race is that race involves biological groupings or subspecies of human beings on the basis of certain physical traits which were transmitted by heredity through genes. 

 

Supposedly, these physical traits are not always exhibited in the totality of a given race (thus, the issues of skin color, nose shapes, eyes, etc can “theoretically” vary within races--but this does not seem correct in the real world, in terms of pure thoroughbreds or complete full bloods who have not been subjected to earlier genetic alterations from some man-made or man-induced action or actions). 

 

Per Columbia, these different physical traits arose from mutations (the popular evolutionary word used to describe differences--ed), selection (also another popular evolutionary word--ed), geographic adaptation (another popular evolutionary idea--ed), and genetic drift (one more evolutionary concept--ed).  In other words, we have the different races and kinds of people in the world today because of evolution. 

 

However, the tragedy of this scientific explanation is that it does not represent the Hebrew Scriptures (either the OT or the NT).  It is all fiction and make-believe which simply will not hold up to truth and righteousness. 

 

This background on the evolutionary world of so-called scholars and brains takes the student of truth to the next point of assessing how this evolutionary thinking now permeates the entire Christian Church, with few if any exceptions. 

 

 

Thus, Christian Evolution 

 

It is amazing that so many people, including Christians, believe in, support, teach and advocate evolution (which was just described and as addressed earlier), although many hypocritically claim otherwise. 

 

Now, this statement will shock many readers of this paper.  Surely, "good" Christian people would never believe in and support evolution, one might argue.  But they do so, as can readily be seen in any discussion on the origin of the human races. 

 

For example, most Christian Churches and peoples interestingly speculate, guess, think, assume and presume that all of so-called humanity (including all of its differences, varieties, kinds and representations all over the globe) do, in fact, descend from a common pair of humans named Adam and Eve and/or as developed by evolutionary processes. 

 

This theology is, of course, the basis of Christian false worship which stresses the brotherhood of man and the need for Christian preachers, teachers and evangelists to go out in the world with their “Gospel” to convert and change all humans/humanoids to their beliefs.  Christian writer Sydney Cleveland typifies this in his view that “we are all brothers and sisters in Christ” (Nov-Dec 1997 “Sabbath Sentinel,” p. 10). 

 

However, a student of truth should pause and give this theology some careful thought and consideration before jumping on the band wagon of acceptance.  Does it really sound logical and plausible and is it genetically possible that a true, homogenous pair of human beings named Adam and Eve could produce the incredible human variation now visible on planet earth today? 

 

Despite this popular, proud, vain view, it is interesting that in the heart of Black Africa, true, 100%, Black people reproduce true, 100%, Black children, kind after kind. 

 

In some (few) places in Scandinavia or the Baltic states, 100%, pure, White people reproduce 100%, pure, White children, kind after kind.  And in some places, in perhaps Mongolia, 100%, pure Mongoloids reproduce 100%, pure, Mongolian children, kind after kind. 

 

 

A Mormon Evolutionist 

 

This writer once sat near an "educated" Mormon biologist, of sorts, on an extended airplane trip across the Pacific.  Although he was theoretically a Christian believer, he had evolutionary ideas and thinking about the source of humans/humanoids across planet earth in our time. 

 

This man believed that Adam and Eve had "evolved" from some earlier form of life (while there may have been previous life forms on an earlier earth, he allowed that the evolved Adam and Eve were themselves unique in some ways when they existed 6,000 years ago). 

 

And then, in conformity with the traditional thinking of Christendom, the Mormon dogmatically asserted that from Adam and Eve, all of the present races, varieties and kinds of humans/humanoids evolved (as found on planet earth today).  In other words, Adam and Eve produced the now present White, Black, Brown, Yellow, Red, etc peoples (in skin and hair color) across the globe. 

 

As proof of “evolution,” this person argued that alleged human beings have been and are continuously evolving, as they have never reproduced kind after kind since the time of the first pair.  In his warped mind, homogeneous married men and women, as he saw it, did not and do not necessarily reproduce copies of themselves. 

 

In his thinking, all of the fantastic varieties, kinds, races and differences in so-called human beings proved conclusively that evolution was true.  After all, they all had evolved, in his eyes, from a common, single pair (based upon mutations and natural selection, as outlined formerly). 

 

 

A Sardis Woman 

 

In another separate situation, this writer also came into contact with a Sardis, Sacred Name, Sabbathkeeping, believing woman (of sorts) some years ago, who likewise parroted the same common Christian nonsense.  This woman also assumed, guessed, thought, believed and presumed (from intellectual pride and vanity) that all humans/humanoids descended (evolved) from Adam and Eve. 

 

This Sardis woman, under discussion, predicated her great intellectual "brilliance" upon the theory that the huge varieties, kinds and breeds of domesticated dogs were all brought about through selective interbreeding from a single, common, original pair which she conceived was created in the beginning by The CREATOR. 

 

In her view that dogs had so evolved into the 100 or so modern breeds, then it stood to reason that supposed human beings had also so evolved from Adam and Eve into the huge assortment of different peoples all over earth today. 

 

Well, in both instances (with the woman and the Mormon), this writer tried (unsuccessfully) to explain that all of these varieties and different kinds of both so-called humans and dogs (in terms of the woman) did not, in fact, descend (evolve) from one, single, homogeneous, common pair. 

 

In each situation, there was more than one kind of progenitor involved to produce the assortment of dogs and humans/humanoids found on earth today.  And while the involved, original progenitors could all reproduce and interbreed, they represented distinctively separate and different creations by The CREATOR. 

 

The cases for a creation of the different species of both dogs and humans/humanoids will be addressed in some detail in comments to shortly follow below. 

 

 

The Evolutionary View  

 

The alleged evolutionary development of life on planet earth was discussed in some detail in a previous chapter.  There is no intent to repeat that presentation at this time. 

 

Suffice to say, modern scientists assert that life started in a bowl of primordial soup (actually, the latest theory is that this bowl of soup was a mud puddle or pond scum--May 31, 2002, “The Week,” p. 14).  There once was a theory that life started in the ocean, but the belief now is that the oceans were too salty to start life. 

 

From the mud puddle, bowl of soup, or pond scum (or whatever), the theory is that life evolved into the fantastic representations now visible over earth. 

 

Of course, this view has it that all hominids/hominoids descend from a common tree trunk on this theorized evolution of life.  Actually, Christianity has almost the same view on humans/humanoids--in that the huge variation seen today descend from an original common pair (thus, from an original trunk on a tree). 

 

 

Some New Science 

 

A University of California law professor named Phillip Johnson wrote a book in 1991 which seriously questioned the evolutionary theory of life; and yet, did not exactly subscribe to the creation ideas of Christians and Jews.   Johnson’s work was in the form of a book on “Darwin on Trial.” 

 

Johnson’s work was summarized in the May/Jun 2002 “Biblical Archaeology Review” (p. 16), in that “life is so complex that some sort of rational designer must be behind it.”  Going on, proponents of this new scientific thinking accept an ancient formation of the earth (billions of years ago); and believe that organisms have evolved in some limited forms ever since.  But they reject the argument of natural selection (ibid, p. 16). 

 

The April 26, 2002, “The Week” (p. 9) had a whole write up on “Another challenge to evolution” which focuses upon some of the details of the work of Johnson.  “The Week” says that Johnson’s position is that life on earth did not evolve by mutations, but from a blueprint drawn up by some intelligent outside force. 

 

Actually, over the last several years, a number of UFO buffs have toyed with the thinking that early man was transferred here from some other place in the universe.  Apparently, Johnson’s position is close to this; and even arguably, is not far from creationism, as advocated by Christians and Jews (actually, most modern evolutionary scientists dismiss Johnson’s work as being merely a rehash of creationism). 

 

While it is unclear to this writer how much evolution Johnson would allow, the fact that he spoke of blueprints raises some question about whether his scheme would agree with the Christian theory on the surfacing of a single man and woman who produced the huge variation now visible over earth by evolution or whether he would opt for several different blueprints of different forms of man. 

 

It would be logical, per both Johnson and indeed even from the UFO buffs and their theories, that man was developed on earth from different blueprints or transferred here from another place in the form of several varieties.  Thus, it might be that these new attempts to explain life on earth are more contrary to the ideas of the evolutionists than even Christian and Jewish thinking (which agrees with the evolutionists).  

 

Therefore, the presentation to follow in this and succeeding chapters will make more sense to people like Johnson than it will to most Christians who are obsessed with the theory that there was only one original pair of humans, who evolved over the ages to present the huge assortment of people now visible (this Christian view is, of course, almost precisely the same as historic evolution theory). 

 

 

More on Dogs 

 

In the case of dogs, as mentioned above, it is true that various kinds of domesticated dogs, as well as wolves, coyotes, dingoes, jackals, foxes, etc (in the canine family), can all evidently interbreed and reproduce mongrel, mixed offspring.  But this fact does not prove, suggest or imply at all that all of this variety came from a common, single pair, as Christendom often alleges, teaches and asserts. 

 

On this point, it is interesting that in raw, undefiled (by man) nature, there are a host of different kinds and varieties of animals in the canine family which can all theoretically interbreed and bring into existence mongrel offspring.  But they don’t naturally cross in nature, though they are fully capable of crossing. 

 

And of this variety, it is enormous since there are some 35 species of wild dogs in the world (including the famous dingoes and highland dogs of Australia), 14 species of foxes, several different kinds of jackals, 19 species of coyotes and a huge assortment of wolves, including 32 species of just gray wolves, 24 in the Americas and 8 in Europe (per “Encyclopedia Americana”). 

 

None of these just cited canine numbers include earlier extinct species or subspecies which also must be considered. 

 

Admittedly, man can do so-called wonders by selectively interbreeding animals in a domesticated environment.  But that’s not the way it works in nature.  At best, in nature, breeding is done on a random basis and not on the planned, controlled breeding assumed in natural selection.  True, man has created a number of different breeds of dogs in this controlled situation.  But this is not the reality of nature and wild animals. 

 

 

Ducks 

 

In this discussion, it would be well to pause for a moment and also take a look at the world of ducks.  One encyclopedia (Americana) says that there are at least some 116 different species of wild ducks in the world today, not counting extinct species.  And this does not include the subspecies which can also be enormous (there are some 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks alone). 

 

But the interesting thing about all of these ducks is that, in nature, they fly near each other regularly and often inhabit nearby areas.  Yet, they never cross or mix, although they seem fully capable and able to reproduce. 

 

In nature, you never find different kinds and created orders of ducks interbreeding and selectively breeding to form new kinds and varieties of ducks.  They stick to their own kinds exclusively--just as the different canine varieties never cross. 

 

 

No Mixing in Nature 

 

Therefore, what one finds in the wilds of nature, and as obviously created in separate creations by The CREATOR, are hundreds of varieties and kinds of wild life which never seem to mix and cross in nature, although they are all of the same families and fully capable of interbreeding and reproducing.  Let it be said again, these many different species never appear to mix and cross in nature--naturally. 

 

They avoid each other like the plague.  They stick to their own created kinds and orders.  Assuredly, they do not naturally interbreed.  Of course, man has and can pen up a wolf or coyote and make it cross with a dog--just as man can forcibly cross a donkey and a horse.  But such crossings are unnatural and occur only because of man’s interference someway in the reproduction processes. 

 

There is a theory among some scientists (particularly evolutionists, but also persons advocating creation science) that varieties in nature in the different families or types capable of interbreeding (like the canine family) do selectively interbreed to produce new varieties in nature.  This is called “micro-evolution.” 

 

There is no arguing the capabilities of different species and varieties in family groups to interbreed.  But what this writer must question is the theory that in raw, undefiled nature, these different varieties do interbreed.  If there is any of this interbreeding naturally in today’s mixed-up world, logically, it must be traceable to man’s upset of nature in some way.  Otherwise, even micro-evolution seems out of the question. 

 

 

More on River/Dabbling Ducks 

 

Take the case of the just cited 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks.  It would be easy to account for all of these subspecies on the basis of internal crossings among themselves.  However, that theory simply won’t hold water as one can quickly perceive with a little logic.  

 

If there was just one variety of river or dabbling ducks in the beginning, then this one variety would have always produced kind after kind with no variation.  Thus today, instead of 36 subspecies, we would only have one breed or specie of river or dabbling ducks. 

 

But let us suppose that there were two, three or more varieties of river or dabbling ducks in the beginning.  In this instance, one can more easily speculate that over the ages they did cross in nature to build the present situation with 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks. 

 

However, even this supposition won’t hold water; because in nature, wild life simply reproduces on a random basis and without the controls needed to produce the 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks.  Admittedly, man could take three or so breeds or river ducks and reproduce them in a controlled, pen environment to eventually replicate 36 subspecies (or even more than 36 varieties if man so desired). 

 

Tragically, all of these attempts to justify the 36 subspecies of river or dabbling ducks fall short and won’t measure up to truth.  If there were two, three or more major varieties of river or dabbling ducks in the beginning, and if they did randomly cross in nature, over the ages, they all would mongrelize into a melting pot of confusion and particularly as they moved toward uniformity. 

 

Random interbreeding in nature of kinds that can breed and reproduce would only make for a mass of confusion with none of the resulting ducks being in definable and recognizable varieties (as is true today with the definite 36 subspecies).  Not only would they be all mixed up, but their chances for survival (in the vein of survival of the fittest) would be greatly reduced or perhaps even eliminated. 

 

The fact that there are 36 recognized and definable subspecies of river or dabbling ducks simply spells out a creation of them in the beginning.  They would have never survived in this dimension of 36 variations otherwise. 

 

 

Yes, Micro Evolution is Out 

 

Now, having made these remarks, if someone can speculate or even prove that a male of one river or dabbling duck variety did cross with a female of another variety and she produced a fertile egg from him and later it hatched to produce a mongrel duckling, this still would not alter the reality of the just made remarks. 

 

This duck would be deformed and not fit into the pattern and habits of the other ducks.  Probably, it would not survive and if it did survive and if it later further crossed with its given family of ducks (in the variety of the mother which produced the odd duck in the initial cross), its genes would be absorbed into the variety’s pool of genes fairly soon and would lose all significance. 

 

The essence here is that the 36 varieties or subspecies of river or dabbling ducks will not prove or allow for micro evolution at all.  It is impossible!  Only a creation of all of the varieties in nature makes sense. 

 

 

Exceptions? 

 

Thus, evolutionists may speculate and theorize that these different created kinds cross, interbreed and evolve, but there is no evidence of this whatsoever.  Additionally, the fact that on rare occasions in heavily populated areas, a partly wild, female coyote crosses with a domesticated dog is seemingly because of the unavailability of a male coyote mate due to man’s upset of nature and goes to prove nothing. 

 

A similar rare condition has reportedly surfaced in nature when a particular deer specie in NE Washington was almost wiped out in recent years because of man’s encroaching “civilization,” coupled with an over-hunting of bucks. 

 

In this case, it appears that an isolated female deer of such a group has on occasion accepted a male of another deer specie when she cannot find a mate of her own kind.  The resulting fawn is born defective and sterile.  Since it is genetically defective, it would become a ready prey to predators in a true natural environment (which is not what one finds today where man has killed off and altered the species of wildlife). 

 

Another rare situation surfaced in 1998 when ruddy ducks in Britain, migrating to Southern Spain, were found to be so “sexually voracious” that they mated there with European, white-headed ducks and produced hybrid offspring that were no longer true-bred birds (3-1-98 Guardian, quoted in the Oct 18-24, 1999, “Washington Times”). 

 

The ruddy ducks are not native to Europe, but were introduced there 50 years ago from America.  Therefore, if there is any problem with these ducks, it cannot legitimately be placed on the doorsteps of The CREATOR or of nature. 

 

This writer doesn’t have the details on this fear and proposals to kill the ruddy ducks before the migration.  But if these ducks do cross in nature, the reason surely must be because man did upset their natural order and habitat in moving them to Europe. In the context of (created) nature, it is hard to fathom that such a reality would take place (just like the crossing of the river or dabbling ducks is illogical and improvable). 

 

One more tragic cross arose in recent years in North Idaho, along the St Joe River.  Historically, this area had Cutthroat Trout.  Someone got the bright idea to also introduce Rainbow Trout into the area.  The Rainbow and Cutthroat crossed and have produced some hybrid fish.  But all of this arose because of man’s stupidity and not because these kinds would ever cross in raw, undefiled nature. 

 

 

Another Issue 

 

“The Week,” of Jun 15, 2001 (p. 18), had a report of some recent examples of the crossing of different animal species (like horses and zebras, lions and tigers, different kinds of owls, and different varieties of fire ants, etc).  The article said that this mingling is caused by humans who have taken wild species from their natural habitats and confined and crowded them into non-native habitats in wildlife refuges (as in Africa). 

 

Hybrid animal offspring tend to birth defects and shorter lives.  Many are born sterile, as is the case of the deer, discussed above. 

 

There is another fall-out in the man conceived efforts to cross species.  The Sep 9, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 14) noted that the Nanjing Zoo had crossed a lion and a tiger to produce a hybrid cub, born on August 22, 2002.  It was not clear whether the zoo used artificial insemination or what to produce the cub.  Interestingly, this aberration was rejected by its lion mother and soon died from an infection. 

 

Obviously, such abnormal crosses simply do not occur in nature as designed by The CREATOR.  Thus, the theory that different kinds of species naturally cross in nature is pure and simple hogwash.  It exists only as a figment in the mind of evolutionary proponents (who will not accept the simplicity that YHWH created the different, natural varieties in families). 

 

With having said that these hundreds of kinds of canines, ducks, etc. never seem to cross in nature (that is nature--undisturbed, undefiled and unaltered by man), it is interesting that all of the domesticated animals and birds we now know of “theoretically” came from man's efforts to domesticate them from earlier wild stock, as evolutionists see it.  Later comments will disprove this theory! 

 

 

Selective Inbreeding 

 

In reality, it is only man who can and does take different kinds of wild animals and birds from nature and in the man-made and man “controlled” environment, force species of different created kinds and orders to reproduce and cause new mongrel kinds which can be continuously and selectively interbred to eventually create a new breed (apparently, it takes about ten generations or so to create a new breed of dogs). 

 

Additionally, within a specific kind, man can and has selectively interbred them on the basis of some particular quality or characteristic--like size or some other factor.  Small, miniature animals are produced by this method.  But typically, this just doesn’t happen in the wilds (if undisturbed by man).  Of course, man follows this interbreeding practice “within” various species and breeds. 

 

But this is all done in the man controlled and man forced environment (where the species lack freedom to move, room about and choose their mates in the natural, random way ordained by The CREATOR).  Diet can also affect size somewhat and particularly so among humans/humanoids (within limitations).  So man can alter diet and help attain some desired end on size. 

 

Of course, any “free” animals in nature (or even in a domesticated environment) subject to crossing could and would only breed on a random, chance basis and would never ever “selectively” interbreed, as man can force them to do in a controlled situation.  But even here, this is certainly not the real world type of stuff.  In the wilds (if undisturbed), different species simply do not cross, although they physically can do so. 

 

In most animal species in nature, it appears that a female ready for mating will mate randomly with the first male of her kind to reach her. 

 

 

Strength 

 

In many instances, females end up being taken by the physically strongest and most powerful males of the kind without any regard to other physical characteristics. 

 

Take the case of wild sheep, horses, etc.  The males fight it out and the winner gets the females.  In the case of some animals, it appears that the female is the dominating sex, in contrast to the male. 

 

But again, domination or strength seems to be the primary determining quality and not something else--although there may be a few minor exceptions.  For example, chickadee males seem to compete in their world for the attention of females (May 24, 2002, “The Week,” p. 14).  Possibly, peacocks or other birds may use their feathers, strutting abilities or something else. 

 

Whether a particular male or female has a certain unique coloring or discoloration seems generally quite irrelevant, certainly in the majority of cases.  A random occurrence and/or sheer strength usually determine the breeding.  Among many species, a pecking order is established--based on strength and power to preserver.  Breeding is often predicated on this factor. 

 

Consequently, it is quite manifest from any observation of nature that wild animals do not practice selective breeding practices (so-called natural selection) on the basis of alleged variations or mutations--beyond the obvious strength (dominating) factor just mentioned.  In other words, survival of the fittest prevails (as occurring in strength). 

 

 

Separate Creations 

 

Tragically, it seems that ignorant, prejudiced, proud people have got it in their warped minds that all of the ducks (and perhaps geese and swan, too, since they are in the same family) came from a single, common pair; that all of the domesticated dogs, wild dogs, wolves, jackals, foxes, coyotes, etc came from a single, common pair; and that all of the humans/humanoids all over the globe came from a single, common pair. 

 

These dumb people predicate their ridiculous evolutionary beliefs on the fact that within the various families of the created order, reproduction is possible. 

 

These so-called scientists and thinkers then postulate that from one breed or variety, the many other varieties of a specie (capable of interbreeding) mysteriously “evolved” in nature and/or were domesticated by man over the ages.  Even many Christians believe this nonsense. 

 

They insist on wanting to believe that The CREATOR made only one pair of canine.  And from this single pair, the hundreds of varieties (capable of interbreeding), now evident, evolved.  They make the same assumption about ducks, geese, cats, mice, rats and you name it (including so-called human beings). 

 

Again, man may create new varieties in his controlled pen, but new varieties do not surface in true nature, undefiled by man. 

 

What these foolish evolutionists lose sight of is the fact that a single variety would have always reproduced “kind after kind” in raw, undefiled nature--which is the Scriptural formula.  They would have never selectively interbred in nature on some supposed quality (i.e. coloring, spots, etc). 

 

In historic times, as well as today, purebred animals in the wilds of nature reproduce kind after kind.  They never create new varieties and kinds (as can happen in the man-controlled environment where man forces different varieties to interbreed, contrary to nature). 

 

In truth, based upon what the Scriptures do say and what is readily apparent in nature, it is sufficient to make one correctly perceive that The MOST HIGH separately created all of the different kinds and varieties of life on this earth, including the hundreds of species of canines and ducks and the original, major races of man. 

 

 

Domesticated Versus Wild 

 

Before leaving this sub-topic of where domesticated dogs and ducks came from, this writer would like to acknowledge that there is some evidence from the Scriptures that The HIGHEST specifically created certain breeds and kinds of domesticated animals (like some different dogs) in a specific creation, along with various "wild" living creatures (like different wolves) in Genesis 1:21-25. 

 

The evidence for this creation distinction between domesticated animals, as opposed to wild animals, will be presented in a later section of this study.  Suffice to say, and regardless of what YHWH created in domestic animals, man has interbred them over the years with each other and wild stock (illegally) in the man controlled environment. 

 

Therefore, as there were separate creations of different breeds, kinds and varieties in domesticated and wild animals, man later crossed these creations to bring into existence new mongrel kinds also capable of further interbreeding and crossing, as has been done over the years by man to produce the enormous variations and (man-made) breeds of dogs, ducks, horses, cattle, etc now present today. 

 

 

Man-made Crosses Are Not Natural 

 

But such man-made crosses do not happen and will not survive in nature--only in the domesticated environment by selective and controlled interbreeding.  Such man-made crosses of canines, ducks or whatever are just not capable of adapting and surviving on their own in nature (that is nature undisturbed and unaltered by man). 

 

This is an important point.  Man has created a number of varieties of certain domesticated animals and birds (like dogs, ducks, etc).  But in general, these man-made “kinds” could never survive on their own in nature.  What man-made breed of dogs, cats or ducks could survive in the wilderness of raw, undefiled nature?  Most or perhaps none of them would make it. 

 

Horses may “possibly” be an exception here since some of them have apparently transitioned from man created mongrel stock into wild Mustangs, as happened in early America.  But in general, the man-made domestic varieties could not survive in raw nature if they were thrust into it and had to survive based upon their own genetic qualities.  Most could not find food or they would quickly become prey to predators. 

 

Maybe, these man-made breeds can make it with man’s help and in man’s controlled environment (where man feeds and takes care of them), but they just won’t hack it in the wilds (which are undisturbed and unaltered by man) where their survival depends upon the creative genius of The CREATOR, Who made the various natural kinds and varieties uniquely capable of survival on the basis of their own genetic merits. 

 

Thus, by selective inbreeding of certain mongrel stock, it is possible over time to create new breeds of domesticated stock, as man does (which will generally reproduce kind after kind, but with few throw backs to original stock qualities). 

 

However, all of this is artificial and man-made.  It is totally foreign in the natural order where it simply does not happen.  In nature, species do not interbreed selectively, as Charles Darwin argued. 

 

 

Man Can and Does Illegally Cross Kinds 

 

However, in addition to dogs, ducks and the few other species noted, man has domesticated a number of different animals and birds from nature and has inbred them to form various and sundry new "man-made" breeds.  But in all cases, there has been no evolution in these instances. 

 

All man has done is to take two differently created species (domesticated or wild), which are capable of reproduction, and then force or make them cross in an artificially imposed environment.  This is selective interbreeding and is not found in nature where breeding is done randomly and not selectively. 

 

And in terms of this man-made inbreeding, it should be pointed out that all such efforts are categorically illegal and sinful by YHWH's Word.  Yes, according to the Torah (Lev 19:19 and Deut 22:9-11--which make genetic engineering totally illegal, to be later discussed), it is wrong to take two different created kinds of animals, birds, seeds or whatever, and to cross or mix them, although such reproductions are fully possible. 

 

In Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:9-11, the issue has to be focusing upon species which physically can cross and reproduce and not on two kinds that cannot cross, although this later situation would also be covered when men try to make such reproductions--as for example, in a chicken with a turkey. 

 

Clearly, the issue in YHWH’s law involves man's rebellious efforts to cross kinds that can physically cross, as in the canine family or other groupings.  The fact that YHWH stated that law suggests that its primary focus has to be on species which could sexually cross and reproduce offspring.

 

If the different kinds could not cross (like a chicken with a fox or a chicken with a rat), there would seemingly be no point in having this law. 

 

 

An Ancient Legend

 

Incidentally, there is a Jewish legend that in Genesis 6:12, all flesh became dissolute (“The Book of Legends,” p. 26).  Per R. Azariah, in the name of R. Judah ben Simon--all flesh became dissolute--a dog mated with a wolf and a rooster with a peacock.  R. Luliani bar Tibrin said in the name of R. Isaac--Even the earth acted like a harlot--when planted with wheat, it brought forth tares. 

 

This mention of wheat and tares in this ancient parable could have some particular application over the centuries because of YESHUA’s parable about the wheat and tares (as will be described and commented upon in some detail in a later chapter). 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 108--Evolutionary Problems II

 

 

The Major Races 

 

With this backdrop, from the prior chapter, it is prudent to make mention here of the fact that from an anthropological point of view, there seems to be at least three primary or major races of man on this globe.  These three are:  White (Caucasoid), Black (Negroid) and Red (Mongoloid, which possibly can appear as Yellow after an infusion of White genes--if there is no true Yellow race). 

 

The previously mentioned “Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch with the Fragments of the Jerusalem Targum from the Chaldee” (p. 10) says for Genesis 1 that in the creation of man, “the Lord Elohim took dust from the place of the sanctuary, and from the four winds of the world, and mixed from all the waters of the world, and created him white, red, and black.” 

 

In “The Yellow Peril” (p. 399), first published in 1911, before man’s attitudes were to be contaminated with the new post WWII theories of racial integration and amalgamation, writer G. G. Rupert suggested that there were five major divisions of man--Caucasian (White), Mongolian (Yellow), Malay (Brown), African (Black) and North American Indian (Red). 

 

While a dark bronze or red color is associated with the American Indians, mention must be directed to the historic Southern Irish with their blazing red hair and sometimes red complexions and freckles. 

 

Could the red Irish be another separate race to be added to Rupert’s list or are they just a part of the White race?  Comments to follow will offer some possibilities on this phenomenon on the basis of miscegenation. 

 

 

Four Races? 

 

But more realistically, the ancient Egyptians recognized four major races (White, Black, Red and Yellow)--which are probably more logical (per Charles A. Weisman, in “The Origin of Race & Civilization”). 

 

Per this view, the Red connects to the Mongolians and not to the Irish, who are theoretically a part of the White race.  Yellow could be a Yellow-Brown presentation and particularly so in the hot areas of the earth where yellow can become brown from the sun. 

 

The belief of four major races probably has merit for reasons that will be outlined shortly in this study.  And if the four major races are correct, it must be noted that the way they came about will still allow for the correctness of the ancient Jewish Targums which suggested three originally created races in Genesis 1, of White, Red and Black. 

 

In other words, the original creation was of the three basic races, as provided for in the Targums.  But in later acts, the fourth (the Yellow race, which is usually connected to a group of small boned people across the globe) came about through acts of sin and rebellion toward YHWH’s laws (in the form of miscegenation). 

 

Nevertheless, from a historical perspective, it is these few major races and these major races only which have existed in Adam’s time, although it must be acknowledged that the prior world in pre-Adamic history (between Gen 1:1 and 1:2, elsewhere discussed herein) evidently had one or more classes of hominids/hominoids of some type, whose bones and presence has been discovered by archaeologists and anthropologists in modern digs across the planet (like those in Africa of the famous Leakey family). 

 

The fact that the pre-Adamic earth had some sort of a hominoid population is plainly suggested in Genesis 1:28 in The ELOHIM’s command to Adam to be fruitful, multiply and replenish the earth. 

 

In the Jul-Aug 2002 “End Time News” (p. 3), writer Colin Deal points out that this phrase is also used in Genesis 9:1 in the commandment to Noah and his sons.  As Deal asks, doesn’t these words suggest a prior population on earth? 

 

 

Evolution is Impossible 

 

Thus, evolution has not produced the huge variety and assortment of humans, dogs, cats and ducks from a single pair each of homogeneous progenitors. 

 

No!  The truth is that there were certainly, as a minimum, two and more likely three or more separately created kinds of ancestors (fully capable of reproduction) of people, dogs, cats and ducks in order to cause the variety we behold today. 

 

Of course, with three or more different classes of basic stock of seemingly any animal class capable of reproduction, it is possible to sexually cross them in a “man-made” controlled environment and generate entire new breeds and kinds. 

 

Although man has this capability, it must be again pointed out that such acts constitute sin and are illegal by YHWH’s Word--as established in previous comments. 

 

But for a variety of new breeds and kinds, it takes "more" than one common, homogeneous pair of progenitors. 

 

The continuous random inbreeding of one specific, truly homogeneous breed, kind or specie cannot possibly generate "new" breeds, kinds and species.  All they will do is reproduce kind after kind (which is the Scriptural formula for the entire creation--Gen 1). 

 

Categorically, it takes two or more kinds to produce "new" breeds through sexual reproduction and inbreeding.  But even here, such interbreeding does not occur in nature where breeding is accomplished on a random basis (generally, with no criteria beyond strength). 

 

 

New Breeds Through Miscegenation? 

 

Beyond the pure reproductions of Blacks from Blacks, Whites from Whites, Reds from Reds, etc, it is worth noting that when males and females of the three to five human stock races mix, the resulting offspring is a mongrel or mulatto which in no way reflects the 100% characteristics of either parent.  Such reproductions do not replicate the original or full blood kind after kind (as was true with the creation in Genesis 1). 

 

How can kind after kind reproduce when both progenitors are mongrels or of different racial stock?  At best, they will only reproduce mongrel kind after kind and not true full blood kind after kind.  A mongrel or mixed breed of whatever sort is not a true kind or breed in the strict sense. 

 

Please note what happens when two dogs of different breeds are crossed.  It’s hard to be sure of what the pups will look like.  If two mongrel dogs cross, it’s even more difficult to predict the appearance of their certain mongrel offspring--which can all be different, reflecting any number of characteristics from their various ancestors. 

 

And since both Black and Mongoloid genes predominate over White genes in so-called human beings, any such mixtures mean that the children will basically be Black or Asian, but with only small possibilities of having many European characteristics.  More Black genes mean more Black characteristics.  In particular, color (and color of hair) does predominate. 

 

Also, of course, as the same mongrel children continue to breed and cross back with Whites, and as the white genes begin to displace in number and quantity the colored genes, then the succeeding generations will begin to appear to be more and more "white" over time. 

 

Admittedly, as interbreeding continues, it appears that most kinds of life forms, in at least the human/humanoid and domesticated animal kingdoms, have the propensity to breed toward a measure of uniformity (which will be assessed in the succeeding chapters). 

 

Once a proper breed is produced with some uniformity, the males and females will begin to produce a limited measure of kind after kind in their offspring. 

 

 

Understanding the Variety 

 

The great variety that one can behold among people is easily explainable in the context of miscegenation (in the world today and in terms of skin color and color of hair). 

 

White is reflected on an opaque object that reflects all wavelengths while black is produced when all wavelengths are absorbed (“Concise Columbia Encyclopedia,” p. 183). 

 

In short, the color white is made up of all colors while black is the complete absence of color.  By combining white and black in a certain ratio and certain method, it seems possible to create any desired color.  In this sense, one might build the case that it is technically incorrect to call truly 100% Black people-- “Coloreds.” 

 

On the basis of this truth, some students of the Scriptures and men have theorized that The MOST HIGH only created the White and Black races and that all other productions have surfaced because of the various mixes.  While this explanation seems plausible, this writer leans in the direction of the ancient belief in four main types. 

 

This strange reality of nature, of course, accounts for the great variety of colors of human beings and particularly in skin and in hair.   In previous comments herein, mention was made to the situation with the red coloring of the skin and hair of so many of the Southern Irish, to be later discussed. 

 

It’s not hard to perceive at all that a certain mix of Caucasians and Mongolians, Negroes or Yellows (to be later described) would produce the red complexions of the Irish.  With this background, there is no reason to speculate on any red complexioned Irish race at all.  Manifestly, miscegenation can account for these people. 

 

Consequently, it has only been man's illegal and sinful acts in defiance of Genesis 1, Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:9-11 (as mentioned in the preceding chapter) which has brought into existence the huge assortment of domesticated dogs and ducks and the billions of mongrel peoples all over the globe. 

 

Incidentally, there are a couple of other relevant texts which need mention now, though they will be addressed in some detail in a later chapter.  Here, it should be noted that the Word prescribes that certainly in terms of Adam and perhaps all of the different major human races, man has been allocated specific areas of planet earth to live in (Deut 32:8; Acts 17:26-27). 

 

Thus, Black Africans were evidently given much of Africa; Mongoloids were given Northeast Asia; Whites were given Europe; and the small Yellow-Brown peoples (who are correctly Hamites) were allocated the hot areas of earth from Europe and North Africa to SE Asia and the Pacific Islands. 

 

Despite The CREATOR’s wisdom and thinking in apparently allocating specific land areas to the different major races, man chooses to move people around (or allow them to move) all over the globe to completely upset the creation.  Man follows this same stupid practice in terms of the other created life forms as well. 

 

 

Yes, Man Upsets Nature 

 

Consequently, African killer bees were brought into South America for some ridiculous reason.  And now, they are spreading (unchecked) all over both North and South America.  Gypsy moths were brought into North America in 1869 to make silk.  No silk was ever produced.  But the moths became entrenched over much of the continent to completely wipe out many American trees. 

 

Many years ago, some traveling circus or carnival brought some wild hogs from Europe to America to show off.  While wild pigs were once common in parts of Europe and Asia, they were not historically present in the Americas.  Some of the pigs got loose in NC and now they are running wild all over the Southern mountains.  Though some people hunt them, they have caused an absolute crisis in nature. 

 

The Japanese beetle came into North America somehow because of man’s stupidity and irresponsible actions.  Now, they are all over the US eating up vegetable gardens in an unbelievable fashion. 

 

Mediterranean fruit flies were brought into North America for some ostensible reason.  Now, they are a constant threat to destroy whole orchards (which means that man is constantly spraying poisons to try to control them). 

 

A late report from the Jul 9, 2002, “Spokesman-Review” (p. A1, A5) on “‘Frankenfish’ on the march” said that a monster snakehead fish from China was on the loose in ponds in Eastern Maryland.  This monster fish eats anything and everything and cleans a pond or water way clear of all other fish and most other aquatic life forms. 

 

The snakehead fish can live outside water for three days and can actually walk on its extended fins to move from water source to water source.  It is unclear how many of these fish are loose and where they came from in Maryland--though speculation has it that a bankrupt, closing pet store may have dumped one or more of them into a local pond. 

 

The Asian swamp eel, zebra mussel, fire ants, Asian painted turtles, Russian wheat aphids, redgum lerp psyllids and thousands of other varieties of life forms have been shifted to North America to completely upset nature. 

 

Yet, man continues shifting things around; and then never understands why nature gets completely upset. 

 

 

More Insanity 

 

Asian chestnuts were brought to the US in 1900 for some crazy reason.  They wouldn’t grow here.  But they bought with them a dangerous chestnut blight or fungus which got started and virtually wiped out the entire US chestnut population. In recent years, some Southern pine beetles were brought into the Pacific NW to create enormous ecological problems.

 

 

And More Insanity 

 

The Feb 15, 2002, edition of “The Week” (p. 18) had a news report on “Aliens are invading forests.”  The gist of this story was that modern globalization is decimating America’s forests (per a report from the “New York Times”).  What is happening is that global trade and commercialism is bringing a host of unwanted imports to the US. 

 

For example, the foreign imports have included a fungus that is killing millions of dogwood trees, a canker that affects butternut trees, and a foot disease that is destroying cedars in the Pacific Northwest. 

 

Forest ecologist Craig G. Lorimer of the University of Wisconsin notes:  “To have so many diseases cause so many problems over such a short period of time is unprecedented.” 

 

Lorimer adds that ”You get the impression that clear-cutting is the most devastating thing that’s ever happened to North American forests, and it’s not.”  Every year, some 13,000 plant diseases are intercepted by inspectors at the nation’s ports and airports.  But thousands more get through and are not detected. 

 

 

An Intensification of the Problem 

 

The May 27, 2002, “Time” magazine (p. 54-55) had a lengthy story by Jackson Dykman on “Meet the Beetles” which told about the Asian long-horned beetles which were brought into New York in 1996 in wooden packing crates from China and Hong Kong.  By 1998, they were in Chicago and are now spreading out to other American towns and areas. 

 

Dykman says that the beetles are big and hungry and are going after American hardwood trees (i.e. maple, poplar, birch, elm, ash, horse chestnut, and willow) like “tree-eating machines.”  Already they have destroyed thousands of American trees.  If they get loose in the rest of the United States, damages could run as high as $650 billion. 

 

Entomologist E. Richard Hoebeke of Cornell University says that “it’s the greatest threat to U.S. forestry since the gypsy moth.” 

 

To respond to the threat, US authorities since 1998 have been using powerful insecticides and acoustic sensors.  The sensors detect the sound of the larvae chewing on the trees.  Discovered trees must be cut down and burned. 

 

Along with the Asian long-horned beetles, the Sep 9, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 66-67) assessed the problem in an article on “A long, slow autumn,” by Jessica Ruvinsky. 

 

Ruvinsky noted a whole host of pests and diseases which have been introduced into the US from abroad, primarily in the last ten years (like the citrus long-horned beetle, pine shoot beetle, emerald ash borer, hemlock woolly adelgid, white pine blister rust, beech bark disease, and in 2000, a new unidentified fungus which is spelling out something called the “sudden oak death”). 

 

Obviously, the problem is exploding all over the world as these various bugs and diseases are moved around from place to place to completely upset the delicate balance of nature. 

 

 

“The Week” 

 

The May 10, 2002, “The Week” (p. 14) had a report on another real scary development.  Dangerous marine organisms are hitching rides across the world’s oceans on an ever-expanding flotilla of trash.  Per the story, barnacles, worms, mollusks and other organisms now have more travel opportunities than ever before (in the old days, they moved about with logs, coconuts and ships). 

 

Now, these species find plastic containers (which won’t rot or decay) especially attractive.  Various forms of bacteria and life attach to plastic and other debris products which end up in the oceans.  The debris eventually floats or end up in some far away country to upset its environment. 

 

 

Uncontrollable Plants 

 

Years ago, when man was busy building roads and making cuts and fills for the roads, some supposedly intelligent bureaucrat in Mississippi imported a fast growing vine from Asia to implant along the banks where highway cuts were made. 

 

True, these Asian vines quickly took root and spread rapidly over the cut out soil.  In fact, they spread so rapidly that they got completely out of control to surge over much of the Mississippi Delta. 

 

Today, Southern states, counties, people and businesses in the South fight these spreading vines and usually end up losing--since they are so persistent. 

 

Various kinds of trees and plants have all been effectively obliterated and destroyed from man’s stupid efforts to import bugs and funguses which do not belong on the North American continent, as The CREATOR made things. 

 

 

More Recent Insanity 

 

In 2000, this writer lived in Northeast Washington near an area where a timber company owned 80 acres of forested land.  The company came in and cut the timber, leaving a few seed trees with the intention that the trees would repopulate the area over the next 20 years and allow another later cutting. 

 

Some of the timber company land covered a part of a huge mountain that ran up the valley for miles.  The rest of this mountain and valley was part of a US forest and/or involved several tracts of other private land holdings (and especially in the valley, as it adjoined Deep Lake, near the Canadian border). 

 

There was an old timber road which led up and around the mountain to the top.  This thing had been cut out long ago.  But it still was in fair shape in 2000.  Wanting to use this road for trucks to haul out the cut timber, the loggers brought in a bulldozer which re-graded the road.  Perhaps because of some minor concern over erosion (though it was very rocky), the company officials decided to seed vegetation along the road. 

 

They could have chosen any number of local grasses for this effort.  But instead, they looked at the cost involved and found an alien weed which was cheaper (though it was totally foreign to this area).  They spread these weed seeds out along the road. 

 

Sure enough, this stuff grew fast.  By the fall of 2001, it was all over much of one side of the mountain.  Given time, winds will carry the seed over the entire area. 

 

The weed involved grows to be about six to eight feet tall.  Plants grow close together and completely choke everything else out.  Deer, elk, moose, horses and cows will not eat the weed.  So it rapidly expands unchecked.  Evidently, it will soon cover the mountain and kill off any chances of more trees growing there.  In the late summer, when these weeds die, it will present an enormous potential of a fire hazard. 

 

Did any of the people involved in this effort give any thought to what they were doing at all?  No, evidently not at all.  The whole undertaking was predicated upon profits and money.  The people involved could have cared less what kind of an environmental mess that they would create. 

 

 

Genetic Engineering? 

 

Along with this incredible insanity in moving species around all over the globe, there is another motion afoot which can have extraordinary implications.  This one was spelled out in a story by Nell Boyce, in the June 3, 2002, “U.S. News & World Report” (p. 61), on “Engineered to run wild.” 

 

Boyce mentioned the DNA splicing phenomenon (which, in terms of plant foods, will be assessed in some detail in subsequent chapters herein) and said that plans are now afoot to produce genetically altered animals which “could be released to fight pests and disease.” 

 

While it will take several years of research and tests before such animals are produced, in order to be turned loose in the wilds, the thinking is now proceeding on this option.  As some environmentalists say, the first genetically altered life form may not control any pests, but it may become a pest itself.  An absolute environmental crisis could be in the making with this insanity. 

 

This thinking is even more ridiculous and incomprehensible than the situation with cloning (as it is exploding in the halls of knowledge here in the early 21st century). 

 

The subject of cloning is discussed elsewhere herein.  Suffice to say, it holds out some really dangerous possibilities for life on this planet.  Certainly, the same can be said for genetically altered animals. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 109--Evolutionary Problems III

 

 

 

Movement Toward Uniformity 

 

Based upon former comments, it is also useful to realize that over time (perhaps many, many centuries) a basic mixture of different humans/humanoids will tend toward being a homogenous society.  This strange phenomenon would apply to all varieties and kinds of wild life if they too naturally crossed in nature, as evolutionists suggest.  The result would ultimately be uniformity and not more diversity in species and kinds. 

 

Therefore, in a country, like the Philippines, where the human population is a basic mixture of Black, Red, Yellow and White and where they have practiced gross miscegenation for many centuries on geographically confined islands, they are today leaning toward some “limited” form of being a uniform population. 

 

Japan is another nation where there was originally a basic assortment of at least three races or so (evidently White, Yellow and Red).  The population there has slowly intermarried and interbred so extensively over many, many years, so much so, that today they are beginning to appear to be homogenous in some limited ways.  Parents can “almost” (but not completely) reproduce kind after kind. 

 

Southern Europeans will be discussed in some detail later in this section, and in subsequent chapters.  But for now, it should be noted that they are a basic mix of the different races.  Portugal once had a significant White population--perhaps much like the fair peoples of Northern Spain or Northwest Europe. 

 

But they brought in Black slaves (to constitute 10% of the population) and miscegenated with them (per an article on Portugal, in the 1914 “Encyclopedia Britannica”) and apparently some Hamitic peoples also living there (to be commented upon later).  The modern Portuguese are the result--now with some measure of mixed uniformity. 

 

Sweden, Denmark and other so-called White nations are presently allowing numbers of Blacks and other Coloreds into their countries.  Given sufficient time, these nations will be transformed into something like Portugal. 

 

 

Pacific Islanders 

 

The Pacific Islanders (Polynesians, Micronesians and Melanesians) are all basic mixtures of probably all four of the major races just cited.  The Melanesians have a greater preponderance of Black genes while particularly the Polynesians have lesser Black genes and perhaps more White and Yellow genes. 

 

But over the years, “some” of these populations have miscegenated, so much so, on their confined islands that they are tending toward some measure of uniformity. 

 

Having mentioned Pacific Islanders, it should be noted that this writer read in a college textbook on anthropology, years ago, that ultimately, over time, all of the world’s people will look physically like Polynesians from interracial crossings (per Webster’s, the word interracial applies between the [four] major races and not between two peoples of one race--like a White German and a White Austrian). 

 

In other words, throw all of the globe’s humans/humanoids into the melting pot and they will all come out Polynesians. 

 

Please understand that YHWH did not create the Polynesian, Melanesian, Filipino, Japanese, French, Scottish, Irish, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish, Mexican, Russian, Arab or English racial presentations or the other billions of racial, mongrel humans/humanoids across the globe.  YAH created the three or so basic races of perfect, wonderful, marvelous humans/humanoids--certainly Black, White and Red. 

 

 

An Example from Palau 

 

Some years ago, this writer was on a Continental Airlines plane flying over some of the Pacific islands in Micronesia.  The stewardess was an attractive young woman--slender, European bone structure and features, very light brown in skin color, and with cold black hair, which seemed straight.  She appeared to be a Southern European--perhaps like one would find in Sicily or Greece. 

 

In a discussion with her, she mentioned that she was a Palauan.  Now, the Palauans are the most Negroid of all of the peoples of Micronesia--very close to the Melanesians.  Collectively, they look a lot like the people that one finds in some of the inner American cities. 

 

For example, downtown Philadelphia has a huge Black population.  But Philadelphia has seen so much Black-White miscegenation that a vast segment of the population is mulatto and far removed from true Negroes. 

 

So, what about the Palauan Continental stewardess?  Probably, she had something around 5% or so of Negroid genes, maybe several Red and/or Yellow genes and otherwise White genes.  For two hundred years now, sailors and other visitors to the Pacific Islands have left children.  So there has been an increasing presence of White genes in the population. 

 

The young woman involved probably had parents with few Black genes.  In fact, one parent might have been a White European racially.  Obviously, she had sufficient White genes to have European features and to be slender.  Mixed Aborigine Negroes have the typical Negro bone structure, thick lips and kinky hair and the women tend to be excessively fat and particularly as they grow older. 

 

 

Admixtures In All Continents 

 

Because of some interesting reason, the three great races of White, Black and Red peoples seem to have some close affinity to the three great continents of Europe, Africa and Asia--while the small, Yellow-Brown kind has a recognizable presence in a band of hot areas from Portugal to Vietnam, as outlined in the preceding chapter (Acts 17:26-27; Deut 32:8). 

 

Actually, most of the populations in all three of these continents today involve persons of mixed races to various degrees. 

 

Take the case of Europe which supposedly is the White continent.  The closest people to being true Whites are found largely in Northwest Europe and perhaps over to the Baltic nations.  But even in parts of largely White Scandinavia, one runs the risk of finding people with some strong presentations of Asian and Hamite genes. 

 

In 1934, just about the time that Franklin Rosenfeldt/Roosevelt and Adolf Schicklgruber were becoming public figures out to try to destroy the world, a Swedish woman named Ingrid Bergman arrived on stage in Sweden to begin making movies.  By 1939, Ingrid reached the big times in Hollywood.  It is no wonder that she would go to the top because she was both an extremely beautiful woman and very talented. 

 

On the surface, Ingrid was a very fair, White, Nordic person.  However, upon a closer look, it was quite evident from her high cheek bones, facial structure, hair coloring and other features that she had some Mongoloid genes present (maybe not many, but at least enough to influence her physically in her appearance). 

 

Beyond a presence of Asian/Hamite genes in some parts of the Scandinavian population, it is a fact that the Scandinavians (and the people of the Baltic states) are otherwise some of the most pure White people in existence, as pointed out above.  Surely, the Scandinavians descend from a son of Shem--possibly Lud, who fathered the Lydians and lived in Asia Minor (Gen 10:22, per “The Soncino Edition of the Pentateuch and Haftorahs,” p. 38). 

 

However, other than Scandinavia and the Baltic states to the East, one begins to find more and more prevalent Asian genes in any movement Eastward.  Generally, East Europeans all have heavy Mongoloid genes to different extents.  As one approaches Asia, the Mongoloid genes seem to accelerate. 

 

 

Moving South 

 

Southern Europeans have significant Black genes, as discussed above in connection with Portugal.  Southern Europe also has an extensive presence of small Yellow-Brown Hamitic peoples (which will be discussed in some detail in future chapters) which may largely predominate in some fashion in certain places. 

 

In terms of Southeastern Europe (and Southern Europe, overall, somewhat), the population consists of not only people with mixed White, Black and Yellow genes, but one finds a huge presence of Asian Red genes.  The popular Italian movie star Sophia Loren demonstrates this condition with her very obvious Asian eyes and high cheek bones. 

 

This mix is the classic situation with modern Greece.  The ancient Greeks, in Alexander’s days, were a White, blond, fair, blue-eyed population.  But as true with Portugal, Italy, Spain, etc, the ancient Greeks interbred with other peoples and slaves to form the contemporary Greeks. 

 

A similar situation exists in Asia.  If there are any peoples resembling the ancient true Mongoloids, they “might” be in Mongolia and perhaps among some few, North American, Indian tribes (which originally came from Asia).  As one moves West from Northeast Asia, the population begins to include all kinds of White genes. 

 

In going South from Northeast Asia, White genes surface in numbers for awhile with the Red ones (like in Mandarin China) before eventually merging with small Yellow (or Yellow-Brown) Hamitic peoples (like the Cantonese Chinese and Southeast Asians).  Black genes gain some significance in Southeast Asia and increase appreciably as one approaches India.  Similar distribution problems exist in Africa. 

 

The interesting thing about this distribution is that there are movements of some limited sort toward uniformity in many, many of these sub continental populations.  Thus, peoples in Burma, Armenia, Siberia, Greece, Afghanistan, Tibet, India, etc are not really as profoundly diverse as one may first suppose based on the presence of the unusual mixture of genes.  They have been breeding toward uniformity. 

 

 

Throwbacks 

 

But once parents with mixed genes conceive a child, one must be careful about concluding that the child will always be absolutely kind after kind, even if the parents are “about” the same racially.  The problem is that there can be a throwback (which some might believe to be a sudden mutation) on occasion because of the presence of the different genes in the parents from earlier ancestral miscegenation. 

 

With these many different genes present, the evolutionists (and most Christians) believe that the different species practiced a process in nature called selective breeding or natural selection of variations and mutations to create still new breeds and kinds with only a throwback problem. 

 

Although man can selectively interbreed different kinds, this process just does not happen in nature, contrary to the wishes and theories of evolutionists, as noted above. 

 

Take the case of domesticated rabbits.  There is a breed called “Checkered Giants,” which appears to be a cross of some sort between white and black rabbits.  This cross produces rabbits which are white, but with black spots on them. 

 

It is possible to interbreed those qualities (under man’s control) from black and white rabbits, so much so, that a breed is created which “normally” breeds back kind after kind.  This is a form of uniformity--limited since it is not 100% in all cases. 

 

The dilemma is that when the usual Checkered Giant rabbits are crossed there is always a remote possibility of a throw back with a pure or largely white or black rabbit being born in a litter of otherwise checkered giants.  Why the essentially black or white rabbit?  Those genes are present in the basic breed. 

 

 

Throwbacks in Humans/Humanoids? 

 

However, there are limitations on these throwbacks.  Take the black hair of Negroes and Mongoloids, both of which predominate over the true white hair of Whites.  Once Whites and Blacks cross, the resulting children will carry the Black characteristics of black hair.  Can black haired, dark complexioned, so-called White people cross and produce blond haired descendants from the throwback genes?  Rarely, if ever! 

 

While dark haired, so-called White parents may produce “some” children which have dark blond hair (typically ruddy or brownish in appearance), such hair tends to darken (like their parents) as the children grow older.  This phenomenon is particularly evident among some Anglo Saxons (who are largely White, but with some obvious presence of other genes). 

 

Some say that human (or humanoid) children will evidently not throwback in skin color.  But they can and do throw back in other characteristics.  Perhaps the child with Black genes might tend toward having a big, flat, Negro nose or kinky (curly) Negro hair.  Whites with Asian genes may sometimes have small, slanted eyes (as Roy Rogers had from his Indian ancestry) and so forth. 

 

Another interesting phenomenon occurs on some rare occasions in a basically miscegenated or mixed Negro population (like in the US).  Sometimes, distinctively red headed Negroes surface which seem out of style in the context of the predominance of the Black, kinky hair of Negroes. 

 

The first impression is that there is a clear, very-strong, red-headed, Irish person closely involved to produce a red headed Negro.  While this is probably often true, this writer would also allow that in some situations a Black-White mix could also produce this strange occurrence in a Negro child (yes, it seems possible to somehow mix black and white to produce red, as can happen when black and white cattle cross). 

 

Otherwise, a throwback could somehow be involved.  It is these throw backs (and alleged sudden mutations) which allow the evolutionists to believe that by selective interbreeding or natural selection of such throwbacks, entirely new breeds can be created.  In other words, black or white throwback rabbits (from Checkered Giant litters) can be interbred to produce a breed of black or white rabbits. 

 

But such interbreeding would be a reversal of the breeding process involved to create the throwback.  In other words, it would consist of reverse breeding and be predicated upon the premise that there was an original stock with the characteristics being selectively interbred. 

 

 

The Albino 

 

The question of the albino (lacking pigmentation) in different forms of life needs to be mentioned here.  “The Concise Columbia Encyclopedia” (p. 16) says it is inherited as a recessive trait in animal or plant forms.  This source reports that albino life forms can be interbred (by man) to form a specific albino breed in some species.  But actual albino breeds do not happen naturally in nature where breeding is done at random. 

 

Albino breeds, per se, can only be produced by man in a man-controlled environment by selective breeding.  Apparently, the single albino primarily surfaces as a gene deficiency (similar to a mutation) arising because of excessive interbreeding of close relatives/families in a limited gene pool.  Most or all of the major human races are capable of producing single albinos on rare occasions because of interbreeding. 

 

Albinos are not a throwback--as discussed in the above comments.  Clearly, they seem to be an aberration or something wrong genetically.  To whatever extent they can happen in nature (in the natural order that has been undisturbed or unaltered by man), it would appear that the produced albino is so deficient that it will not survive long in nature and will not reproduce more albinos. 

 

 

Christian Evolutionary Thinking 

 

It is the throwback reality which prompts some Christian evolutionists (like the previously mentioned Mormon) to believe that Adam and Eve (and other animals as well--capable of interbreeding) evolved as mongrels with many different genes, instead of being created as perfect homogeneous full bloods. 

 

In this view, Adam and Eve evolved to be classic mongrels with Black, White, Yellow and Red genes--much like Pacific Islanders, as discussed previously. 

 

The essence of this ridiculous theory is that Adam and Eve and/or Noah and his wife were mongrels with the genes of the different human/humanoid races.  Hence, Noah and his wife produced one White child, one Mongolian child and one Black child (some Christians claim that Ham was the Black one)--either as a throwback or a sudden mutation. 

 

 

Adam and Eve? 

 

“US News & World Report” for Oct 25, 1999, had a lead story on “Is the Bible True?,” which offered a hypothetical painting of what Adam and Eve supposedly looked like on the front outside cover.  The artist did his/her level best to illustrate the famous pair as a uni-blend of the several major races now evident upon planet earth.  In the painting, Adam and Eve were a light brown-slightly yellow color. 

 

Their bodily bone structure, distribution of flesh and possible size appeared to be Caucasian.  The woman’s hair was fairly long and the man’s hair was full and almost to his shoulders.  Both were definitely kinky, black and Negroid in appearance.  The facial bone structures were clearly Asian (high cheek bones and eyes showing evidence of slants).  Finally, the pair’s noses and lips appeared to be Caucasian. 

 

This projected Adam and Eve could easily have been Polynesians.  Importantly, they represent what most of so-called humanity (certainly including Christianity) would expect genetically in the pair.  The only problem is that this conception is totally impossible since kind breeds kind. 

 

Such a couple would have only produced a race of almost Polynesians and not the major, different races now on earth.  So, instead of having the major three to five different races, the world would have been populated with a race of something very close to Polynesians.  They would have reproduced their own form of kind after kind and not the gross variety now visible in today’s world. 

 

 

The “Dawn of Man” 

 

Otherwise, Lincoln Motors sponsored a television miniseries on August 6-11, 2000, on the “Dawn of Man,” which supposedly illustrated early “man.”  Reportedly, it contained “violence, nudity and crude language.” 

 

This writer did not watch the film.  But an ad on it appeared in the Aug 7, 2000, “Newsweek” (p. 5).  The ad showed pictures of some heavily mongrelized Blacks and Whites, who must have been the alleged “early men.” 

 

 

From “Newsweek” 

 

Finally, the leftist “Newsweek” (p. 36-37), of May 21, 2001, had a related story by Kenneth L. Woodward on “Overcoming Sin,” which also focused upon Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.  This article likewise had a hypothetical painting of the supposed Adam and Even in contact with the serpent. 

 

This painting showed Adam and Eve as a multi-racial, mongrelized blend of the races just as the other earlier presentations, and one much like one would find in many Christian Churches.  The most glaring feature which the “Newsweek” account presented was a much darker Adam than Eve. 

 

Otherwise, the Adam was heavily mixed with Asian and Black genes and the woman actually was much lighter in color and more European in bone structure and facial features (although she did show a very obvious presence of Asian features and particularly in the eyes).  Actually, the outlined Eve was not bad looking or repulsive (in contrast with the mongrelized Adam, who appeared to be a sickening mix). 

 

To its credit, the “Newsweek” outline of Satan was something more than just a snake.  In this production, the serpent was actually a mixed crossing of a serpent and a humanoid appearing creature.  It’s amazing that the warped “Newsweek” did not attempt to put over just a snake for this encounter with Adam and Eve. 

 

 

The Views of Herbert W. Armstrong 

 

In “Mystery of the Ages” (p. 148-149), Herbert W. Armstrong offered a slight twist on the traditional Christian theory of creation. 

 

Armstrong suggested that Adam and Eve were created “White” and that Eve was created to produce ovaries which carried White, Black and Yellow genes.  From this variety of genes, she and Adam produced Black, White and Yellow children which went on to further reproduce kind after kind White, Black and Yellow children. 

 

Armstrong also suggested that Noah, his wife and his children were all “White.”  However, as Herbert saw it, Noah’s son Ham married one of the Black women (to produce the Black race), son Japheth married one of the Yellow women (to produce the Asian race) and son Shem married one of his own White kind (to produce Europeans). 

 

What these various Christian theologians are teaching is pure and simple evolutionary theory--although they don’t know it and would be utterly shocked if they realized it.  The backbone of the so-called evolutionary development of human/humanoids is predicated upon an evolution of the many different kinds of Homo Sapiens from a beginning common pair. 

 

 

In Search of Eve  

 

Incidentally, all of these evolutionists, including the Christian evolutionists, got a shot in the arm in a 2002 news report from two scientists (Vincent Sarich and Allan Wilson) doing work at the University of California in Berkeley.  Per a report in the May-Jun 2002 “Prophecy Flash” (p. 35), these two men have allegedly found “that every person on Earth came from the same mother,” evidently Eve. 

 

In doing DNA cell research, these scientists discovered the presence of some DNA material in the human cell called “mitochondrial DNA.”  DNA inside the nucleus of a cell is made up of a combined genetic material from both the father and the mother (therefore, it changes with each generation).  However, mitochondrial DNA is inherited only from one’s mother, and it does not change. 

 

The theory is that this material is common in all so-called human beings.  In terms of evolution, the story said that this finding (supposedly) refutes evolutionary theory (since it would allow that all supposed humans descend from a common mother).  However, there are some flaws in this thinking which were not discussed. 

 

The truth is that the scientists have been totally unable to examine the DNA materials of all so-called human beings on earth, now or in the past.  So much of their work is founded on suppositions, based upon whatever sample they used (which probably came from some few Americans). 

 

It is useless to look at Americans (or likely any other modern peoples) for any worthwhile conclusions since Americans in general are so profoundly and profusely miscegenated and mixed.  As already established in the above comments, the modern world faces the same problem. 

 

It would be a very hard task to find any so-called human being alive today who is racially pure.  In truth, almost everyone known is a mixture.  In this sense, the Berkeley study certainly looked at a “few” DNA samples and drew its conclusion.  The population in the sample had to be very restricted and limited since it was impossible to look at many people (since the DNA data is simply not available). 

 

Moreover, a later chapter will discuss the reality that man (in the form of the various different races) has “much” common DNA with chimpanzees and other animals.  So, even if the different races of man do have some common DNA, it goes to prove nothing because the various human/humanoid types also have much common DNA with apes and other animals and species of life. 

 

The point is that this study is interesting.  But it does not prove or disprove evolution or the allegation that all humans/humanoids descend from a common mother--Eve. 

 

Admittedly, if the DNA of all humans/humanoids was examined and studies were made of the more racially pure people (if any can be found), then it “might possibly” suggest a revelation on racial origins.  But presently, such possibilities are simply not on the table for discussion. 

 

At best, this mentioned study may only prove the wisdom and intelligence of The CREATOR in using similar or like designs and patterns of DNA in His creation of the various forms of life (to include the several different races of man).  This option will be further discussed in the later comments addressing chimps. 

 

Along with the common DNA between so-called humans and animals, it is also relevant to note that the different races and a huge assortment of animals all sexually reproduce and bear young in the same fashion.  They all have similar anatomy, respiratory, blood circulation and waste elimination patterns.  But none of this stuff proves evolution.  It just proves the wisdom of The CREATOR. 

 

 

J. Philippe Rushton, Revisited 

 

One of the excellent writers and honest researchers of modern times is Professor of Psychology J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario in Canada, previously quoted.  In his book “Race, Evolution, and Behavior” (p. 263), he recognizes the three great races (Mongoloid, Caucasoid and Negroid) and suggests that they came from a common origin in Africa (as most evolutionists believe). 

 

Rushton postulates that the original African population “evolved” into the eventual Negroid, Caucasoid and Mongoloid races. 

 

As the White and Red peoples came forth, Rushton says that they began changing (evolving) into humans with larger brains, more intelligence, slower rates of maturation, and lower levels of sex hormones with concomitant reductions in sexual potency, aggressiveness and impulsivity, and increases in family stability, forward planning, self control, rule following and life expectancy. 

 

On all of these factors and qualities as stated, there are remarkable differences between the three great races, as Rushton conclusively proves with scientific research data.  Though these differences can now be attributed to racial genetics, the evolutionary position is that they developed as a process of evolution over vast ages of time. 

 

In the form of a possible addendum to his work, a reader’s letter from Canada in the Jul/Aug 2000 “America’s Promise Newsletter” (p. 5) offered these later remarks from Rushton:  “It is really taboo to notice that blacks do better at sports like running and jumping than whites, and especially more so than do East Asians.  Blacks have narrower hips than whites or East Asians, which gives them a more efficient stride. 

 

“Blacks also have from 3% to 19% more of the sex hormone testosterone, which translates into greater muscle mass and more explosive energy.  But admitting these genetic race differences in sports opens the locked door protecting the greater taboo--race differences in brain size and crime.  That is why it is taboo to even suggest that blacks are better at many sports for evolutionary-genetic reasons. 

 

“We would all be better off by accepting the scientific facts about how biology underlies race differences in sports, crime, and school learning.” 

 

 

Black Crime 

 

Subsequent chapters hereafter will discuss the Negro crime problem in detail.  In particular, a huge assortment of statistics will be presented establishing that the American crime problem is essentially one of demographics.  Hence, there is no intent to really broach this subject now in the present discussion of race--beyond a brief acknowledgment that crime statistics do link to race. 

 

In America, from 30 to 90% of the different categories of crime are done by Blacks who only constitute some 12 or 13% of the American population. 

 

Probably, the most significant Negro crime figures surface in violent type crimes--like murder and assault.  For example, the “Spotlight” paper of Aug 23, 1999 (p. 1), had a report by James P. Tucker Jr on “Federal Stats prove Who the Haters Are” that assessed the 1997 crime statistics from the US Department of Justice, the then latest year of federal data. 

 

The story focused upon some 1,883,000 cases of aggravated assault and attacks that would cause serious injury or death.  A whopping 60% of the various types of violent crimes were done by Blacks.  Some 60% of all robberies were done by Blacks, while only 57% of persons arrested for robbery were Blacks.

 

The May 24, 2002, “The Week” (p. 5) had a news report that the nine people on Maryland’s death row are all Blacks and eight of them were convicted for killing Whites. 

 

A December 17, 1999, report on disciplinary problems in US schools said that in Phoenix, Arizona, Blacks only constitute 4% of the school population.  Yet, they are responsible for 21% of the school’s disciplinary actions. 

 

 

The Wisdom of Jesse Jackson 

 

One of the most fantastic revelations on Black crime came from the well known, Black preacher Jesse Jackson.   This Negro man seems to have far more intelligence and understanding about the real world out there than most White Americans.  In particular, Jesse seems to have some grip on the Black reality. 

 

Jackson said in 1999 that if he was walking on a street in Washington, DC at night and he heard some footsteps of someone approaching him from the rear, he hoped that if he turned around to see who it was that he would find a White person.  As he implied, it could be dangerous if he discovered that he was being followed by a Black. 

 

 

IQ Levels 

 

There is almost no need to even mention basic intelligence levels in the different humans/humanoids.  Philippe Rushton presents a whole array of statistics to show that Blacks are at the bottom of the totem pole on IQ.  There is a huge disproportionate difference between Caucasians and Mongoloids, as opposed to Negroes. 

 

If the reader has blindly and ignorantly believed the lies and deception fed the Western Christian public during the past 60 years on race, then it is easy to allow human gullibility on this subject.  But anyone with brains above the idiot level is assuredly aware of the sharp contrast between Blacks and other so-called human beings.  It is almost ludicrous to even attempt to talk about the differences. 

 

True, in a statistical bell shaped distribution of data, there may be a few Blacks with a decent IQ score.  But there aren’t many.  And most of those who do well seem to have a significant presence of other genes. 

 

Later chapters will broach more fully the linkage of demographics to crime and IQ levels.  More data will be cited from Rushton and another recent work on “The Bell Curve,” by two scientists named Herrnstein and Murray.  Suffice to say, the different races are not all the same! 

 

 

Black Rhythm 

 

One more of the important genetic features of Blacks is their inherent rhythm--along with their natural athletic abilities, as noted above (especially at running and running for short distances).  There is some quality or qualities in the ankles of Negroes (plus, those features mentioned by Rushton) which give them special attributes.  They may not have many brains.  But they make excellent musicians and can really dance. 

 

This writer has been in integrated, Pentecostal, Christian Churches and has seen some of the music get pepped up with a rock n’ roll beat.  Of course, most everybody begins clapping.  But little Negro kids are the most interesting.  As the rock beat picks up, they will inevitably start “jazzing.” 

 

In the early 21st century in Spokane, Washington, there is an inordinate presence of White women being followed about by little Black children (obviously suggesting the presence of interracial sex by the women).   The writer of this study was in a store in Spokane recently and saw one of these tragic exhibits.  The woman was fairly attractive and the child (about three or four years old) had an obvious African father. 

 

The kid was undisciplined.  So, upon entering the store, his animal instincts took over and he tried to see how much damage and destruction he could produce.  Several times, the woman told him to stop.  But he went on in his undisciplined fashion. 

 

All at once, the store started playing some rock music over the store intercom (perhaps for the supposed listening comfort and pleasure of the customers).  The wild, little brat stopped his destructive efforts and started dancing and jazzing.  For a fact, it would be unthinkable to see a little White or Asian kid do this in public.  But not so with an African.  They’ve got natural rhythm.  And it is genetic, as Rushton allowed.  

 

 

Peter Gabriel 

 

“The Week” of Jul 6, 2001 (p. 8), had a short news report on “Peter Gabriel with apes.”  This writer is unacquainted with Gabriel.  But apparently, he is a well known singer of the Rock scene (at least, the story referred to him as the “ex-Genesis singer”).  Anyway, Gabriel has a project underway to teach bonobo apes at Georgia State University to play keyboards. 

 

The article said that the bonobo apes are close genetically to chimpanzees.  Allegedly, they naturally appreciate music and rhythm and can understand 4,000 English words (this description suggests that these apes may have much in common with behemah hominoids/humanoids which will be defined in comments to follow). 

 

Possibly, the apes may even communicate telepathically (evidently with each other).  Apparently, Gabriel has undertaken a project of working with the apes and expressing concern over their future--if and when they are sent to zoos across America in coming days. 

 

Anyway, the significance of this story, as a news item in “The Week,” is that there are reasons to believe that these particular apes have some capacity for rhythm--evidently natural rhythm--much like Negroes are automatically in possession of.  Thus, it might be that Black Africans are not the only specie on earth with this unique propensity for natural rhythm. 

 

 

No Evolution in Nature! 

 

While the various evolutionary theories have found wide acceptance (even in Christendom, as noted earlier), it is interesting that these conditions can never ever happen in the real world from any two parents irrespective of their races.  The children of mixed marriages of non-homogeneous parents would merely be mongrel mixes of the two and would never create distinctively new, original races or kinds. 

 

With mixed, mongrel parents, there is no way to know exactly what the children will look like (as is also true with pups from mongrel dogs).  Conversely, true homogenous parents produce children who are totally kind after kind (omitting the gender issue).  Mongrel, non-homogeneous parents produce children who are likewise mongrels. 

 

In some few places in Scandinavia, it has been historically possible to go into a school room of six year-old children and find all of them looking exactly alike--very white skinned, blue eyed and even pure white hair (and not as dirty blondes, as arising from racial mixes or as gray haired persons from the reality of aging). 

 

It has also assuredly been true that in some parts of Black Africa, little six year old children in school have looked exactly alike.  The same observation can be made for small Mongoloid children in some early Indian tribes or in parts of Mongolia.  In these cases, the homogenous peoples produced children who were categorically full bloods--kind after kind, who all looked alike. 

 

But with every passing day, the possibilities of finding true Whites, Blacks, Yellows and Reds become increasingly more difficult since all of the earth’s populations are grossly miscegenating--as is now happening all other America (which is producing many, many, different mongrel mixes of humans/humanoids). 

 

 

Mongrels Cause Genetic Confusion 

 

In a mongrel society, as is true in modern America, it is impossible to go into the typical first grade class and find children who look alike (excepting the gender factor).  Like their mongrel parents, the typical American classroom is full of very different children.  The same occurs routinely in most sexual unions of mongrel peoples.  There is no way of knowing what children will look like. 

 

For certain, they will not be truly homogenous as is always the case in full blood or purebred species which do properly produce kind after kind (as the Scriptures ordained for the creation in Genesis 1). 

 

Since supposed White, Black and Red parents are themselves mongrels in most of today’s warped world, they do not correctly breed back kind after kind (as at creation).  True, Whites will produce White children, Reds will produce Red children and Blacks will produce Black children. 

 

But even here, the offspring are not genetically true full bloods in the sense of kind after kind.  Today, most so-called White, Black, Red and Yellow peoples are already profoundly mixed from centuries of prior miscegenation. 

 

In any case, mongrel peoples cause confusion among their offspring--in contrast to how things work out in nature among wild animals.  Offspring from any and all species should reproduce kind after kind (as is the Scriptural formula). 

 

Yet, among the offspring of both mongrel humans/humanoids and mongrel domesticated animals, confusion inevitably prevails from the vast ages of man-made crossings of kinds/species which should never have been crossed and mixed. 

 

However, it is manifestly true that as centuries of interbreeding have taken place and a modern population is fairly homogeneous (like Japan, Korea or the Philippines), the population does breed back toward a form of kind after kind to the extent that the mongrel parents are homogenous in the vein of the centuries of miscegenation and breeding toward uniformity. 

 

 

The Difference in Man and Nature 

 

Though it is almost, if not totally impossible, to find truly homogenous peoples in the world today (where parents are exactly alike and reproduce precise copies of themselves)--because of extensive miscegenation among humans/humanoids, the same thing cannot be said of wild animals in nature. 

 

Most wild animals in nature (when undefiled by man) have not faced the detrimental effects of miscegenation.  Thus, they are truly homogenous and reproduce exact copies of themselves.  Hence, one can look at and behold any number of various baby animals and they all (100%) are exactly alike in a litter (virtually indistinguishable to the naked eye) and are precise copies of their homogenous parents. 

 

While there are distinctive differences in gender or sex in some animals and especially as they grow older (certainly, male lions are distinguishable from female lionesses), wild animals (undefiled by man) are generally very homogenous and look precisely the same.  It is hard or virtually impossible to ascertain any differences in the young of any specie of wild animals, birds or fish (beyond the gender reality). 

 

Yes, in the very opening chapter of the (re)creation or (re)forming of the earth for habitation by Adam, YHWH established and ordained a great commandment in decreeing that kind are to reproduce after kind (Gen 1:11-12, 21, 24-25).  This is one of the primary commandments that was established by The ELOHIM to govern the entire creation.  As the Book says, it was “good.” 

 

Not only do miscegenated humans/humanoids fail to produce this “kind after kind” reality, but even many domesticated animals face the same plague because they have underwent illegal crossings by man in their ancestry.  As noted elsewhere herein, mongrel dogs are not going to reproduce true kind after kind in their pups. 

 

Miscegenation or illegal crossings in any specie opens the door to variety in their progeny. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 110--Evolutionary Problems IV

 

 

Evidence of the Different Genes 

 

Having mentioned previously the situation with the popular film actresses Sophia Loren from Italy and Ingrid Bergman from Sweden (with their very evident Asian genes of high cheek bones), it would be well to note a couple of relevant observations on this phenomenon.  It is a very common condition among people with heavy Mongoloid genes to produce a child with high cheek bones. 

 

Another fairly common reality of persons with heavy Mongoloid genes is to produce children with small eyes which sometimes even show a slight slant.  Popular movie actress Jane Seymour demonstrates this condition--with her very apparent Asian eyes and high cheek bones (no wonder--because she is reportedly part Asian Oriental in her racial ancestry). 

 

Famous cowboy movie star Roy Rogers had American Indian ancestry (as mentioned in some prior comments).  Rogers had small, slanted eyes which never really helped his movie career.  Sometimes, these small eyes can be beady or cat eyes. 

 

While Mongoloids and people with Mongoloid genes tend to have triangular or diamond shaped faces (which sometimes can seem to be extremely round, like a circle or ball, when seen from the front), Negroids and people with Black genes tend to have more square or blocked faces (which also can seem to be somewhat round in some cases--but in a different way [usually somewhat round at the corners of the square or block face] than as is true with Mongoloids). 

 

Significantly, there is a certain Black-White mix which produces at least male descendants who are stocky, big necked and reasonably large headed.  These persons often exhibit a very distinctive square or block face which is most recognizable--as in the case of J. Edgar Hoover, who will now be discussed. 

 

 

J. Edgar Hoover 

 

The famous John Edgar Hoover (who headed the FBI from 1924 until his death in 1972) was a person of mixed blood--according to Black author Mildred “Millie” McGhee of Pike County, Mississippi, who was on the Coast to Coast AM radio show on July 30, 2000.  Her recent book was entitled “Secrets Uncovered:  J. Edgar Hoover--Passing for White?” 

 

Ms McGhee had heard all of her life that she was related to Hoover (her grandfather was said to be a second cousin to J. Edgar).  So things fell together in recent years for her to hire professional genealogist George Ott of Salt Lake City, UT to address it. 

 

Millie’s conclusions, cited on Coast to Coast, suggested that Millie’s believed ancestor, Elizabeth Allen (evidently her great-great-great grandmother--per “Secrets Uncovered,” p. 10, 216), was the great grandmother of Hoover, making him and Millie second cousins, twice removed (if Elizabeth was correctly Millie’s great-great-great grandmother). 

 

In Millie’s slave ancestry, some of the women were known as “bed warmers” in their masters’ homes. 

 

Per Millie’s family information, an apparent or accepted Black woman named Elizabeth Allen was reportedly a slave bed warmer in the household of a 19th century White Hoover family in Maryland.  Her mother before her was a bed warmer as well and had slept with a White man in Virginia to produce Elizabeth (who was taken to Maryland). 

 

Based on traditional knowledge, Millie’s book has it that Elizabeth was one-half white (ibid, p. 20).  But she might have been whiter since her line of ancestral women to Elizabeth were perhaps all bed warmers in White households for some time. 

 

Thus, there is a good chance that by the time Elizabeth came along, she had quite an array of White genes.  Thus, she was likely far removed from the typical black Negro. 

 

 

To Maryland 

 

In time, Elizabeth Allen, as a young woman, allegedly ended up warming the beds of William Hoover in Maryland or Washington city. 

 

Per Millie, her first child was a daughter named Emily (born in 1840), who was taken from her mother and removed to Pike County, Mississippi to be used as a bed warmer by both Christian Hoover and his son William Hoover (these Hoovers lived in Mississippi, but they were possible relatives of the Maryland Hoovers).  Per Millie (ibid, p. 216), she descended from Emily (born in 1840). 

 

In any case, Ott established that J. Edgar’s great grandmother was a woman named Elizabeth A. (born around 1814 in Virginia).  But Ott apparently found a marriage record for William Hoover to this Elizabeth A., suggesting that she was a Huff (which could have been her maiden name or it might have been that she was a widow named Huff). 

 

Moreover, Ott’s research with the 1870 MS census (ibid, p. 220-223) seems to suggest that the mother of Emily (born in 1840) was possibly another older Emily Allen who was born around 1814 in Maryland (Emily, born in Mississippi in 1840, was living with this Emily Allen and a Black man named Henry Allen in the 1870 census). 

 

Thus, this 1870 census record might allow that Millie’s known ancestor Emily Allen (born in 1840) was actually a daughter of this older Emily Allen who was born around 1814 in Maryland (suggesting that it was the older Emily was taken from her mother in Maryland and removed to Mississippi). 

 

This older Emily may have obtained the name Allen from Henry.  Or it’s possible that she brought it with her from Maryland, and Henry took her name on their marriage or cohabitation (since slaves took various family names when they were freed in the Civil War). 

 

In any case, this means that Millie’s believed ancestor, Elizabeth Allen, was apparently not the Elizabeth A. who was married to William Hoover. 

 

Since the tie to J. Edgar Hoover was based largely on Millie’s family tradition, it might be correct that Elizabeth A., wife of William Hoover in MD, was actually a sister to Emily Allen, born in MD near 1814.  Maybe they were both born of another Elizabeth Allen of Virginia who had been taken to MD at an early time (in which case, Millie’s grandfather and J. Edgar were third cousins instead of second cousins as reported). 

 

 

Black, For Sure 

 

J. Edgar Hoover was born in 1895.  But there are questions about the propriety of his family records.  A check of some of them seems to allow that there was perhaps some alterations (reportedly, J. Edgar used FBI agents to alter some of his family records).  So possibly, the believed ancestry of J. Edgar is false in whole or in part.  If true, his Black tie could have come from anywhere. 

 

Since Edgar was seemingly far too white to have had as much as 12.5% of Negro genes, it seems patently clear that his earliest Black ancestor (Elizabeth A., her mother or whomever) was a very white Negro (perhaps a high yellow or light brown Negro, as she was apparently desired as a bed warmer). 

 

In any case, per Ott, the Maryland William Hoover married Elizabeth A. to produce seven children in MD or DC.  One of her sons was a boy named John T. Hoover.  He evidently married a White woman and produced a son named Dickerson N. Hoover.  Dickerson became the supposed father of J. Edgar.  Thus, the reported Elizabeth A. was J. Edgar’s great grandmother. 

 

For sure, J. Edgar did show enormous signs of being a biracial person.  But whether his Black genes came from Elizabeth A. or from some other source is uncertain. 

 

Pictures of his alleged birth mother (Anna M. Scheitlin or Strilein) show her to have some of the same dominate Negro characteristics, suggesting that she also may have contributed to J. Edgar’s evident Black genes. 

 

The distinctive appearance of J. Edgar (stocky, big shouldered, thick necked, big headed, protruding chin, large jaw-bones, and square-chubby faced) is one that appears from time to time in variously mixed White-Black people (and particularly when coupled with dark coloring and/or black hair). 

 

Film star Emmanuel Goldenberg (alias Edward G. Robinson) and Communism’s Karl Marx (both Amalekites) each had this distinctive look, suggesting a certain White-Black mix of genes. 

 

While his face is not particularly chubby faced, it is important to note that popular country music star Johnny Cash has a very square shaped face with distinctive jaw bones.  As he is an accomplished musician, he surely must have a fair share of Black genes in his genealogy. 

 

While most of the Kennedy family members don’t particularly show evidence of Negro genes, certainly US Senator Ted Kennedy does with his very square or blocked face look.  When one adds in Teddy’s chubby facial attributes it makes a good case for him to have very clear Black genes (with his Irish Edomite ancestry, this makes sense). 

 

 

Not Rare At All 

 

This appearance in mixed White or Black people is actually not rare at all.  It can be easily found in many public figures. 

 

Besides Goldenberg, actors Brian Keith and Brian Dennehy both seem (or have seemed to be in the case of Keith, as he is now deceased) top heavy with very thick necks, big shoulders, big chests and narrow hips.  Their heads and faces have not been as square or blocked-type as with Hoover.  But otherwise, their faces are/were noticeably still a little chubby. 

 

This writer grew up in the 1940s.  Back in those days, there used to be a fairly popular movie series about the Bowery Boys with a ham actor named Leo Gorcey.  Gorcey was a short, small man and fairly dark in color.  His face/head was not totally block shaped, but it was not far from it.  For sure, he had a chubby face, protruding chin and distinctive jaw bones which must immediately suggest some Black ancestry. 

 

Ernest Borgnine, Robert Urich and William Bendix were other well known figures in American movies and TV who seemed to have definite Black genetic characteristics--with broad shoulders, thick necks, chubby faces and very protruding chins. 

 

Bendix furthermore had the distinctive Hittite nose (as will be described hereafter) and showed evidence of Edomite genes (evidently from an Irish-Phoenician heritage). 

 

Likewise, Danny Thomas, Ernie Kovacs, Telly Savalas and Tennessee Ernie Ford were other well known actors who definitely had more than a fair share of dark genes.  It’s hard to say whether all of their Colored genes came from Negro or Mongoloid ancestry.  But as dark as they were, the better guess would be that all four of them had a Negro ancestor. 

 

For a female representation on this theme, one can look at modern film actress Velerie Bertinelli.  She has some of these same genetic facial features (square or block type).  Likewise, popular TV personality Rosie O’Donnell (a known butch lesbian) clearly shows strong evidence of Black genes (besides her obvious Edomite genes). 

 

The former first lady of the United States, Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy, wife of John F. Kennedy, showed very prevalent Negro genes in the bone structure of her face (the distinctive chin and heavy jaw bones), possibly from her French ancestry (the French have been notorious for crossing with Blacks).  Mrs Kennedy (later Mrs Aristotle Onassis) was thought by many to be a very beautiful and glamorous woman. 

 

In mentioning Bertinelli, Bouvier, Kennedy, Savalas and Kovacs, it must be noted that the lineage or ancestry of these persons was all foreign and not historic American in the traditional sense. 

 

 

Many People

 

Probably, the ancestry of these individuals and multitudes more like them was Southern or Southeastern European where miscegenation profoundly affected the populations.  Thomas was an Arab-American to define the origin of his dark genes. 

 

The same genetic phenomenon also surfaces among some mixed Blacks.  The famous Fats Waller (a piano player, singer and band leader in the 1940s) was a clear Negro man (with many obvious White genes, since he was not really black in color).  Waller had this same appearance with a stocky neck, big head and square/block/chubby face. 

 

Though Waller had big eyes, manifest Negro lips and a big flat nose (all common Black characteristics), he was not that much different in appearance from J. Edgar Hoover or Emmanuel Goldenberg. 

 

It is a certainty that a particular mix of Black-White genes produces the distinctive appearance of people like Hoover, Goldenberg, Marx, Cash, Kennedy, Bertinelli, Bouvier, O’Donnell, Keith, Dennehy, Bendix, Waller and so forth. 

 

 

Anatomy 

 

While both true Blacks and Whites seem to present well proportioned and symmetric bodies, for some strange reason, a mongrel mix of Black and White genes can produce a child with very thick necks and heavy shoulders (as described above). 

 

Females with a Black-White mix of genes particularly can turn out to be stocky, big shouldered and with narrow hips.  Somehow, many of these women don’t seem to be very feminine in appearance. 

 

Apparently, Red-White mixes can also produce children with disproportionate bodies, apparently tending back the other way with thin necks and shoulders and wide hips.  In this regard, actresses Esther Williams, Ava Gardner, and Jane Russell all suggested Indian ancestry.  Gardner and Russell both could have been as much as 25% Indian.  Some Red-White mixed women are notorious for wide hips. 

 

Beyond the wide hips among some White-Red mixes, it must be noted that all supposed Blacks are not narrow hipped.  The Hottentots of South Africa were noted for being wide hipped.  The remains of one of these large hipped women (named Saarti Baartman) was brought to France for display in 1800 because she was so incredibly wide hipped (May 3, 2002, “The Week,” p. 7). 

 

While the genealogy of the Hottentots is not clear to this writer, there has to be a suspicion that there is some presence of other genes in their ancestry (possibly Red and/or something else in a mongrel mix to cause the very large, wide hips). 

 

Therefore, it does seem possible for some genetically mixed Negroes to produce these huge wide hips.  So it must be allowed that some Black and other mixes can also produce females with very wide hips (depending upon the other genes present). 

 

Also, many Negro women (especially those with mixed White genes) can tend to be exceptionally big and fat (all over). 

 

 

Another Sample 

 

The writer of this study once knew of one more especially interesting case.  There was a very Caucasian man who married a woman (who was ostensibly White). 

 

The woman had a block appearing face; a thick, protruding, lower forehead near the eyebrows (with the rest of the forehead receding back to the hair line, similar in some ways to the foreheads of chimpanzees or apes); a pronounced, protruding chin; heavy jaw bones; and other facial features that clearly showed evidence of Negro genes. 

 

The heavy, square, distinctive bone structure of her head/face was very similar to what one can readily detect among many mixed Negroes with White genes (of course, most Negroes, including those with White genes, also generally have large, flat, wide noses and thick, protruding lips). 

 

In some ways, it looks like some of these mixed persons have had their heads placed in a vise so that as they grew and developed pressure was applied from the top down and from the bottom up under their chins and jaws (like the Flattop character in the old Dick Tracy comic series) to produce a very square or block shape face/head with the protruding chins and jaw bones, and thick lower foreheads and eyebrows (this appearance is very common among Blacks). 

 

This couple under review had at least two boys.  The boys grew up with square type heads/faces (one was very pronounced) with stocky necks, big shoulders (one also had a very big chest), protruding chins, strong jaw bones and thick, protruding, lower foreheads near the eyebrows (which were similar in many ways to Hoover’s anatomy). 

 

In temperament, both of these boys were far removed from their father.  The Negro genetic influence came through to dominate much of their mentality and thinking (which was very perceiving and irresponsible--like Blacks).  The father could never understand his two sons--since they simply could not think or act like him or the other White people in his family. 

 

The protruding chins and jaw bones seemed to predominate in this woman’s other descendants (for at least several more generations). 

 

These problems have some presence in some other miscegenated Whites.  Hollywood comedian Bob Hope and actress Alexis Smith (of the 1940s and 1950s) both had such protruding chins and jaw bones.  Since Hope was such a big talking extrovert, it also makes one be very suspicious that he must have had some Negro genes. 

 

This writer has known of other persons over the ages with similar chins, and it is very easy to spot such chins in the public at large.  Large, square, blocked, protruding jaw bones are not always quite as obvious.  For sure, they seem to be a genetic disposition of some persons with Black genes. 

 

 

Other People as Well 

 

This writer could mention several other illustrations of this same basic genetic disposition in certain people.  Former US President Abraham Lincoln showed strong evidence of Negro genes in his head and facial bone structure (per an Internet report, genetic research on Lincoln’s relatives suggest that he had some genetic problems--specifically a genetic disorder called Marfan syndrome and perhaps ataxia). 

 

His black hair and dark complexion was a tip-off that he had something in his ancestry besides White genes.  Side photos of his head showed the very revealing, protruding chin and strong jaw bones and a thick, lower forehead (with large eyebrows), as found in mixed White-Black miscegenation. 

 

Lyndon Johnson was another US president who exhibited very similar physical conditions.  LBJ had a protruding chin and distinctive jaws. 

 

Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee was in the news in late 2001 and early 2002 because of India’s conflict with Pakistan over Kashmir.  The controlled media was ablaze with pictures of Vajpayee.  The Jan 14, 2002, “Time” magazine (p. 32) had a close-up photo of Atal which demonstrated a classic racial mixture with a heavy Negro presence.  Atal had a square, blocked, chubby face and very protruding chin. 

 

This same “Time” magazine (p. 33) had a good photo of the Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf.  Pervez was a much lighter colored man with heavy Mongoloid genes, as outlined in his high cheek bones.  Both the Indians and Pakistanis will be addressed at some length in subsequent chapters. 

 

In the religious field, one should take note of radio preacher Herbert W. Armstrong.  A picture of his father in “The Autobiography of Herbert W. Armstrong” (v. I, p. 56) shows this same square or block head features commonly found among biracial people with mixed Black-White genes. 

 

As a young man, HWA himself was very dark and showed heavy Negro genes in his facial bone structure--plus probable genes of Cain which contributed to his small size (ibid, p. 95, 192). 

 

 

More Illustrations 

 

There is another interesting realty in some Black-White mixes. 

 

This writer knows of a family with mixed genes where the appearance of some members of this family have the protruding chins, large jaw bones, thick lower foreheads and actually even an element or semblance of a black streak around the eyes (near the eyelids, just above and/or just below them). 

 

Actress Jean Harlow (of the 1930s) also seemed to have a dark coloring around her eyes (either that or Hollywood purposely colored them dark).  Moreover, Ms Harlow similarly showed strong evidence of a Black-White mix in the bone structure of her face.  It seems a certainty that she had some Negro ancestry. 

 

While former President Warren Harding (1921-1923) did not demonstrate Black bone structure in his head and facial features, photographs of him suggest that he, too, had some black coloring around his eyes.  This reality could be a tip-off that Harding had some Negro genes.  This is a most interesting condition and one not commonly found among many people. 

 

Because true Negroes genetically tend to have narrow hips, it is interesting that many so-called Whites with Black genes also tend in the same direction.  Females may not show it much when they are young girls. 

 

But as these women age, some of them lean toward being stocky with big shoulders and narrow hips (as was outlined earlier). 

 

Former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir was an older woman who clearly showed evidence of her African genes.  The very physique of Golda Meir was such that it is hard to imagine being married to her (stocky and narrow hips).  She was not an appealing woman physically. 

 

Conversely, so-called Whites, with significant Mongoloid genes, tend to be wide hipped, as pointed out above  Some miscegenated European-type women (with Mongoloid genes) can grow extremely broad across the bottom as they grow older (particularly after bearing children). 

 

Beyond these phenomena, it is also true that people with certain mixes of genes can lean toward being just excessively fat and obese.  This genetic disposition in numbers of modern people is a tragic reality of interracial sex.  Many such mixed people have a weight problem and it is no easy proposition to deal with it (since it is genetic). 

 

 

Heads 

 

Moreover, one of the fallouts of miscegenation is that the resulting children can be deformed and have physical, genetic blemishes which affect their health over the years.  For example, maybe the children’s heads are extra large (out of proportion) for the rest of their bodies (as noted above in some White-Black mixes). 

 

Some Mandarin Chinese (mixture of Mongoloid and other racial genes) offer classic illustrations of this reality.  Please note the proportion or size of heads among some Asians in relation to their bodies--especially Chinese. 

 

Another classic illustration of this was the cases of popular Hollywood actors Brian Donlevy and Humphrey Bogart and even TV personality Ed Sullivan to some extent (evidently now all deceased).  Their heads were disproportionate to the rest of their bodies. 

 

This problem of having a disproportionately large head in comparison with the rest of the body is a phenomenon which can surface in the production of mules from crossing donkeys with horses.  Of course, this type of a cross is totally illegal by YHWH’s Word and it results in a real aberration. 

 

In terms of size, mules can be counted upon in being larger than donkeys and smaller than horses.  And in most cases, their heads will be inevitably larger in proportion to the rest of their bodies.  Surely, there are other disproportionate aspects of their bodies.  The point is that the big headed problem is not one simply for human beings.  Manifestly, mules clearly demonstrate the dilemma. 

 

Moreover, maybe some children’s teeth are too big for the size of their mouths.  Many persons have too many, big teeth for their mouths and have to have some of them removed in order to avoid a grotesque dilemma in appearance and in eating.  Perhaps some internal organs are out of proportion, size or shape vis-à-vis their bodies and other organs and on and on in terms of genetic defects. 

 

 

Legs 

 

Moreover, there is another feature common to Orientals in general, and even among other mixed persons somewhat.  Many racially mixed people tend to have short legs in proportion to the rest of their bodies (especially in White-Red mixes).  So big heads and short legs can be a problem with some persons from the interracial mixes of humans/humanoids 

 

 

A Common Problem 

 

By the way, Ian Punnett was hosting the Coast to Coast program when Millie McGhee was on the program.  He remarked that George Ott says that 23% of White Americans have Black ancestry while some 75% of Blacks have White ancestry.  In view of the heavy Black genes in Southern Europeans and Hispanics, it is correctly true that the percentage of Whites with Black genes is substantially greater than 23%. 

 

Huge portions of the so-called Hispanic peoples have significant Black African genes.  This reality is common in both Portuguese and Spanish derived peoples--though, in fairness, the Portuguese have been much worse than the Spanish in practicing racial miscegenation.  The basic racial stock in Portugal and Portuguese linked Latinos show heavy Black genetic representations. 

 

Some Hispanic areas in the Caribbean (like Puerto Rico, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, etc) are virtually 100% of mixed races.  All or almost all Puerto Ricans and Cubans seem to have Black genes.  As for as the rest of the Caribbean, where so-called Blacks live, one finds Negro people who almost without exception have White or Hamitic genes (Haiti, the Bahamas, Trinidad, etc). 

 

The interracial mixing in the Caribbean area is enormous.  The same thing can be said about huge parts of Central and South America.  Some areas, like Brazil (with its linkage to Portugal), are extremely mixed.  While there has been much European mixing with Indians in Mexico, it is also true that huge numbers of Mexicans have Black genes. 

 

It is also relevant to note that whereas much of the racial crossings with Blacks in American and Northern European stock have involved basically White people, the crosses in Hispanic lands lean more toward a crossing of the historic small-boned Yellow-Brown Hamitic stock with Blacks. 

 

Interestingly, Southern Europeans, with this basic Hamitic stock, have often crossed much with Africans over the years, causing a huge presence of Black genes in their populations (as will be detailed below and in later chapters). 

 

 

Big Hamites? 

 

Hamitic peoples (who are basically a mixture from their very beginnings) also have distinctive genetic characteristics and problems.  Though these persons are small boned and small sized, as cited above, they can sometimes get some size through miscegenation with other larger humans/humanoids (like with Whites and Reds). 

 

Since it is true that the presence of mixed genes may introduce some of the characteristics cited above for Black-White mixes (like being top heavy with thick necks, big shoulders and narrow hips and having block faces/heads), there is some prospect of these features appearing occasionally (at least sometimes, but not often) in Yellow-Brown Hamites mixes with persons carrying both Black and White genes. 

 

For example, this writer once met a White appearing man whose father was a Mexican (to be described in a later chapter).  His mother was evidently a very white Danish woman.  Physically, he carried many of her genes.  He was tall and appeared to be White.  However, he was a little top heavy with a thick neck, big shoulders and chest.  From the waist down, he was small. 

 

Of course, these very characteristics are reflective of Black-White racial mixes.  Obviously, in the case of this man under discussion, he took the genes of mainly his White mother and some of the Black genes from his Mexican father (while physically ignoring many of the Hamitic genes of his Mexican father, which would have made him smaller in statute and slender). 

 

 

More on Hamites 

 

Young Hamite women can be very beautiful and desirable and particularly since they are so small in stature (despite being darker in color).  Of course, it was one of these women (of the Philistines, from Ham) who enticed the historic Samson.  We all know the story of Delilah and how she caused the downfall of Samson. 

 

But these attractive women typically become fat and obese as they age (and especially, if they have a heavy preponderance of Black or Asian genes somewhere back in their genealogy). 

 

As noted elsewhere herein, film start Elizabeth Taylor is a person with apparent mixed genes.  It’s a good bet that she has some heavy Hamite genes and who knows what else (maybe Negro genes with her big eyes).  When she was young, she was pretty, slender and small.  But as she aged, she became fat.  As a friend of mine once noted, poor Elizabeth has been grossly used, misused and abused (at least, in her sex life). 

 

It is very fascinating that the common crossing of Yellow-Brown Hamites in Southern Europe and Latin America with Negroes do not produce the same physical reactions as so often occurring in Black-White mixes. 

 

As discussed above, there seems to be some propensity for Black-White mixed people to have square shaped heads and faces, protruding chins and jaw bones, thick necks, big shoulders and generally to be big and heavy from the waist up (like in the case of Emmanuel Goldenberg, Brian Keith and Brian Dennehy, cited previously). 

 

But these characteristics, so common with Black-White mixes, do not seem to always appear with any frequency in Hamite-African mixes.  However, it seems that the basic small stature of the Cainite genes often prevail even in crosses with Blacks. 

 

Take the case of the Aborigines/Australoids of Australia and the Pacific.  Despite their likelihood of several genetic mixes, many of them seem fairly slender and small, evidently from the influence of their Hamite genes (the case with Australian actress Sigrid Thornton will be broached in a later chapter to demonstrate this phenomenon). 

 

 

The Nose 

 

There is an interesting feature on the issue of the human nose in Hamite/Cainite crosses with Blacks which should be mentioned here.  This writer has seen this nose phenomenon more commonly in Polynesians who are a very racially mixed group of people. 

 

It seems to be fairly easy to spot a Polynesian who has some strong presence of Negro genes (which many of them have because of the mix of their small-boned Hamitic stock with Blacks and others over the centuries).  Some Polynesians have a very distinctive Negro nose (except it is often not quite so large or profuse, as those found among more racially pure Negroes). 

 

This writer has seen Polynesians with small Negro noses.  They can be somewhat distinct for their small sizes (in contrast to the true Black noses which tend to be big, flat, puffy and wide with large nostrils).  Some Polynesians exhibit the Negro nose, but their noses are often small--despite being wide and flat and with large nostrils. 

 

Conversely, Caucasian people have long, straight, narrow noses (with small nostrils) which tend to stick out from their faces. 

 

With much travel and presence in Micronesia, this writer has not found this small, flat, wide Negro type of small noses as being extensively prominent in Micronesia as one would first suppose since the Micronesians have far more Black genes than the Polynesians. 

 

Instead, those Micronesians with the heavy Black genes usually have the larger Negro noses (distinctively big, wide, flat and with large nostrils) than what one can sometimes find among Polynesians. 

 

Among some Whites of European extraction, it is also possible to find some small noses that sort of come to a stick up point in a perk or perky fashion. 

 

The situation with Bob Hope and his possible Black genes was mentioned in preceding comments.  His nose was certainly not formed in the traditional Caucasian manner of being straight and narrow and protruding from the head.  Hope’s nose had a definite point or tip on it which was pushed up slightly. 

 

In the immediate post WWII days, an extremely beautiful woman named Jennifer Jones arrived on the Hollywood scene.  She became a top flight star who received much favorable press over the years.  Despite her beauty, she had a small perky nose, but it was not flat or wide.  However, like the situation with Bop Hope, Jennifer’s nose definitely was not a classic Caucasian nose. 

 

This writer has seen many Chinese with the same type of small, perky noses.  Since the Chinese are a mix of Mongoloid and other genes (White and some Yellow-Brown in Southern China, as one approaches Indo-China, Burma and Thailand), it clearly suggests that these small perky noses probably are a product of Red crosses with others--perhaps Whites and/or maybe Hamites. 

 

White or Hamite crosses with Negroes can also produce small noses.  But these Black genes tend to make these noses be somewhat more flat, wider and with somewhat pronounced and distinct nostrils (as sometimes found among Polynesians, per the above comments)--in comparison with those from Hamite-Mongoloid mixes where the noses are much narrower and the nostrils are smaller. 

 

 

The Hittite Nose, Revisited 

 

While on the subject of noses, it would not be right to proceed without acknowledging the famous aquiline, eagle, hooked and/or figure six nose as found among some peoples of Hittite heritage.  This type of a nose will be addressed in some detail in later chapters which comment upon the Amalekites who seem to have a disproportionate share of this type of nose. 

 

Incidentally, on the presence of this extremely recognizable Hittite nose, it should be stated that this type of a nose is to be found in certain Europeans, along with the Amalekites (as will be described in subsequent chapters). 

 

Some years ago, this writer met a Chinese woman on Saipan Island.  She had a airplane ticket and a visa, and was in transit to Australia after a short stop on Saipan.  Importantly, she looked very Chinese in eyes and cheek bones.  But this woman had an extremely visible and distinguishing Hittite nose.  It was a classic Hittite nose.   Obviously, she had a Hittite in her ancestry somewhere.  

 

 

Eyes 

 

In terms of eyes, it seems evident that Mongoloids generally have small eyes while Whites and Blacks have larger eyes (Negroes have the largest eyes of all).  Of course, these features translate to the mixing of the races. 

 

Preceding comments have already broached the eye feature arising in some crosses (particularly those involving Asians with Caucasians).  Many people with heavy Asian genes have often very small eyes and/or slanted eyes (so-called cat eyes). 

 

Conversely, it appears that certain White-Black crosses can produce really large eyes that are very distinctive (some people take big eyes, at least with predominantly White women, as a sign of beauty). 

 

Many Negroes with White genes (like Coretta Scott King, Black politician Jesse Jackson and the previously mentioned Fats Waller) have very large eyes.  Of course, this phenomenon also appears among some Whites (apparently with some presence of Negro or other genes).  The mixed J. Edgar Hoover had noticeably large eyes. 

 

The popular actress Joan Collins (who was on TV for years) had both big eyes and high cheek bones.  Moreover, she showed her Hamite origin in size and hair.  Thus, it would seem that Joan had some Negro and Mongoloid genes, along with her Amalek-Hamite heritage (the Amalekite ties to the Hamites will be assessed in later chapters). 

 

Bob Hope clearly showed his Negro genes with his large eyes--in addition to his distinctive chin, jaw bones and facial bone structure (as allowed in preceding commentary herein).  Also, Jackie Gleason clearly showed his Negro genes in his big eyes and chubby, square face. 

 

Nothing further needs to be said on the eye theme here--beyond recognizing its presence and manifestations in particularly mixed blooded people. 

 

 

Tongues and Speech 

 

The April 26, 2002, “The Week” (p. 7) had a story from South Korea on the growing popularity of Koreans to have their children undergo surgery to supposedly help them physiologically be able to speak English better. 

 

The operation being done is a lingual frenectomy, involving the snipping of the tissue beneath an abnormally short tongue to allow it to reach the roof of the mouth.  When the tongue is too short, it adversely affects the ability of the person to pronounce the R’s and L’s used in English. 

 

While there is some argument from doctors over the source of the problem (some say that it is not physiological, but is simply the reality that the R sound is not present in the Korean language), the fact remains that numbers of Korean doctors and people believe that the problem is one of genetics.  Accordingly, they attempt to correct it by this surgery. 

 

Frankly, this writer would just suggest that the whole subject makes sense because the Koreans are an interracial mix of some sort (with White, Black, Hamite and Mongoloid genes).  It is also fascinating that the problem does not seem to surface as readily among the Japanese or Chinese.  It may largely be a Korean-Negro problem, for whatever the reason might be. 

 

Interestingly, the typical Negro also has an enormous problem in properly enunciating English and certain other European languages (they can’t pronounce the R sound in English).  This difficulty exists with Blacks from Africa, America, Europe and the Caribbean area.  This Negro problem is probably the source of the Korean problem as the Koreans have some heavy Black genes. 

 

When Blacks talk, it is usually fairly easy to recognize them as being Negroes at once (for whatever the reason might be).  In America, this Black talk is called “Ebonics.”  It will be more fully described and elaborated upon in a later chapter herein. 

 

 

Skin Coloring? 

 

Although this writer presently lacks any scientific knowledge on the subject, some source of information came to me many years ago suggesting that a child can never be darker in skin coloring than either of its parents.  In other words, brown or muddy colored parents cannot possibly produce a very Black child. 

 

This condition, if true, completely destroys the theories of most evolutionists and particularly people like Herbert W. Armstrong (as discussed previously herein with his view that Adam and Eve were White, but that she produced ovaries which carried the mixed genes of other races). 

 

In other words, a mixed couple or a couple with mixed genes cannot possibly produce a pure Black or pure Red child.  Manifestly, there is no way that two so-called White people (regardless of how mixed their gene lines could be) could ever produce a pure Black or Red child. 

 

 

Hair 

 

As pointed out in previous comments, it goes without even having to say that Black hair in people come from Negroid, Mongoloid and/or Hamite genes.  True Caucasians are white-haired persons.  Obviously, the color of black hair is an enormously strong quality in miscegenated humans/humanoids. 

 

Too, kinky hair is definitely a very strong Negro trait.  Sometimes, in miscegenated families, the kinky hair problem persists for generations--usually, in the vein of so-called “naturally curly” hair.  Some of the Edomite Khazars and Irish show this reaction from time to time.  Both Karl Marx and Edward G. Robinson seemed to have these persisting genes. 

 

 

Reproductive/Sex Organs 

 

There is a feeling among some men who have been involved in sex with non-White females that their anatomy is different from White women.  This writer has heard this view from various male colleagues over the years.  An old saying is that when the missionaries arrived in America they taught the natives to have sex face to face (whereas earlier, they had sex like dogs and other animals).  

 

This writer must confess much sex sin over the years.  Certainly, there is shame on my part, and these words are in sadness.  Anyway, after being with different Asian women (Japanese, Chinese, Filipino and Korean), this writer can verify that the sex organs of those women are different from White women.  They are not the same!  Evidently, the same is true with Black women and White women with heavy Black or Asian genes. 

 

 

More From Ott 

 

George Ott also indicated that historically mulatto/mixed blooded children born in America with Negro ancestry were commonly classified as Blacks in pertinent official records.  Any presence of Negro genes made a person a Negro in White eyes.  If these mongrels grew up in a household with so-called Negro parents, they were Blacks and irrespective of how white they may have been in color or appearance. 

 

Television host Bryant Gumbel and both Mr and Mrs Colin Powell in the modern world are all so-called Blacks, but with enormous white genes.  Even O. J. Simpson has a lot of white genes.  Obviously, OJ’s mixed children produced with a White woman have substantial white genes. 

 

With some Negroes being this white in color, it would not take many more generations of crossing back with Whites before the children could easily pass as Caucasians.  As some of these mixed children reached adulthood and left home, they often would begin to hold themselves out as Whites--if they were white enough to be accepted in the White community. 

 

Per Ott, thousands have made and do make the transition from Black to White annually in the US.  Though J. Edgar Hoover probably knew about his racial status, he obviously held himself out as a White man most or all of his adult life. 

 

Hoover was very ashamed of his Black ancestry and went to great effort to sanitize many of his records in Washington and Maryland which proved it (as pointed out in preceding comments, he used FBI agents for this purpose).  There was some concern in Millie McGhee’s immediate family about discussing the Hoover connection.  Millie’s grandfather discouraged the talk for fear of being murdered by Hoover. 

 

After Millie appeared publicly on Coast to Coast, the US Justice Department began an immediate investigation into her activities.  This department contacted her and ordered her to turn over all of her records and information to them.  So far, she has refused to do so.  This is strange that Justice would demonstrate this concern over Hoover, who has been dead since 1972. 

 

 

But They Breed Toward Uniformity 

 

Howbeit, given sufficient time, the descendants of racially mixed parents will eventually breed toward uniformity--especially in confined and limited areas (and not toward more uncalled for variation). 

 

Again, when Pacific Islanders interbreed, they collectively tend toward uniformity and not more diversity--although there can remain the rare, limited throwback question under discussion, as outlined by the checkered giant rabbit situation where this man created class of rabbits carry the mixed genes of earlier ancestors. 

 

Well maybe, animals can be interbred on the basis of throwbacks in man’s controlled environment (to produce a reversal of the throwback characteristic, as discussed earlier).  But they simply do not interbreed randomly in nature that way.  Too, there are clear limits in throwbacks and a demand that the diverse genes be genetically present to allow the throwback. 

 

Categorically, human beings at large do not practice such controlled, man-made breeding patterns.  Collective humans/humanoids all over the globe interbreed without regard to any discernible selectivity or logic (beyond occasional beauty, money, power and brawn). 

 

As noted earlier, many animals breed on the basis of the sheer strength of the most powerful males to dominate the breeding cycles.  This has nothing to do with any throwback characteristics--except in the context of power and strength. 

 

Moreover, what tends to happen, in fact, is that different kinds miscegenate toward a reduction or elimination of distinct differences, as noted above.  In other words, random interbreeding (as would typically occur in nature with kind after kind breeding) does not produce new breeds. 

 

But rather, interbreeding of different kinds eliminates diversity and results in a motion toward uniformity and a more homogeneous population.  Even different kinds of humans/humanoids (collectively left to themselves) interbreed to produce uniformity and not diversity, as the historical record conclusively proves from Japan, Polynesia, the Philippines, Iceland and the rest of the world. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter 111--Evolutionary Problems V

 

 

Crossing of Kinds Is Illegal 

 

Beyond YHWH’s law at Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:9-11, previously discussed, there are a host of other Scriptures which conclusively prove that man’s forced interbreeding between different kinds is sin and wrong. 

 

At the creation, YHWH’s principle on marriage is set in Genesis 1:11-31, where He stated reproduction to be kind after kind, which He defined as good. 

 

Other texts follow-up with the details on prohibiting miscegenation and interracial sex (Gen 6:1-9 [yes, Noah was perfect in his racial genealogy, kind after kind--Gen 6:9]; 24:1-4; 27:46; 28:1-2; Ex 22:19; Lev 18:23-30; 19:19; 20:15-16, 22-26; 21:14-15; Num 25:1; 36:8; Deut 7:1-3; 17:15; 22:9-11; 23:1-9; 27:21; Josh 23:11-13; Jud 3:5-8; Ezra 9:1 to 10:44; Neh 9:2; 10:30; 13:3, 23-29; Prov 5:10, 20; 6:24; 7:5; Jer 2:21-23; 31:27; Dan 2:43; Matt 24:37-39; Lu 17:26-27; I Cor 10:8; Heb 12:16 [yes, Esau was a fornicator in his marriages involving miscegenation--Gen 26:34-35; 27:46; 28:6; 36:2-18]; Rev 2:14); and for sure, it is bad for an Israelite or ger woman to marry a nokri/nekar male to rule over her (Ex 21:7-8; Deut 17:15; Joel 2:17). 

 

As suggested in previous chapters, The CREATOR did not create all of the different mongrel kinds and varieties of humans/humanoids, dogs, ducks, cattle and so forth that man has produced over the past 6,000 years. 

 

YHWH did not make the modern Filipino, Scottish, Irish, Polynesian, German, French, Italian and Ethiopian races.  He did not create the approximately six billion mongrel peoples that now inhabit planet earth. 

 

Of all of the “domesticated” breeds of animals and birds now in existence, YHWH may have created a few of them, but not all of them.  The huge variety of kinds/varieties found among so-called human beings and domesticated animals and birds did not come from the creative acts of YHWH.  They did not materialize through any supposed evolutionary actions in raw, undefiled nature.  They were largely produced by man. 

 

These thousands of varieties of humans/humanoids and domesticated animals and birds came about because man has historically refused to obey and adhere to YHWH’s laws, as outlined in preceding presentations. 

 

Man has rebelled and chosen to illegally mix not only himself with each other, but he has even taken animals and birds (both domesticated and wild) and forced them to mix and cross contrary to the natural created order. 

 

YAH created the three, basic, human/humanoid races; the total of the different kinds/varieties of wild species in nature; and some varieties/kinds of domesticated animals and birds.  YHWH made this entire creation perfect. 

 

Man has come along and done his best to illegally mix-up the creation to form a whole assortment of mongrel humans/humanoids and mongrel domesticated animals and birds (which are far removed from the original creation). 

 

 

The Fall Out of Illegal Crossings 

 

Having mentioned The ELOHIM’s Torah prohibiting the crossing of different kinds, some persons will come forward and try to argue against YHWH’s wisdom and thinking in His Torah.  Certainly, real believers and followers of YESHUA would merely accept the Torah and obey it without question. 

 

But rebellious, disobedient people (who will not follow YHWH’s Torah) do not understand that there are important, adverse, physical, genetic factors involved in unscriptural crossing and interbreeding.  Disobedience of YAH’s Torah makes for problems in the children or offspring of mixed kinds (Ex 20:4-6).  For sure, such crossings produce a curse (Deut 27:21). 

 

 

The Health Issue 

 

Thus, there are many bad fall-outs from miscegenation.  Children can be born with certain types of genetic curses.  It is important to note that genetically more-pure people in all of the major races do not incline towards the previously mentioned aberrations in physique and bone structure.  It is a product of miscegenation.  Truly, miscegenation was never YHWH’s will or way. 

 

Clearly, many (not all) genetic diseases and inherited defects seem to be the result of illegal miscegenation.  In some families, certain health difficulties tend to surface more than in other families in the general population.  For example, some family groups tend to have heart problems and heart attacks while others seem to produce other organ problems (like defective pancreases causing diabetes or something else). 

 

Of course, there is the historic problem that certain diseases identify with certain racial or ethnic groups (assuredly here, the identity is linked to certain racial or ethnic groups as developed or perpetuated in specific forms of miscegenation). 

 

Thus, diseases like Tay-Sachs and Usher Syndrome are linked to Ashkenazi Jews for some reason or reasons (Jun 16, 2003, “Jerusalem Report,” p. 32-33).  Sickle cell anemia is a problem among certain Blacks for whatever reason. 

 

The Nov/Dec 1997 “Prophecy Flash” magazine (p. 3) quoted an article from “USA Today” of Jul 18, 1997, on genetics, which noted that tests can now determine genetic predisposition to 450 different medical disorders.  The story said that some 23 members of a Goldman family in Irving, CA had a genetic abnormality which can cause irregular heart rhythms. 

 

A similar report on “Young and Bipolar” (by Jeffrey Kluger with Sora Song) surfaced in the Aug 19, 2002, “Time” magazine (p. 39-51).  The bipolar or manic depression problem has been recognized for ages and reportedly affected famous people like Lord Byron, Edgar Allan Poe, Robert Schumann, Vincent Van Gogh, Virginia Woolf, Ernest Hemingway and Curt Cobain. 

 

The “Time” article made the case that the disease is genetic and may be traceable to ten different chromosomes.  Manifestly, there are all kinds of problems in people which can clearly be sourced to their genes. 

 

While uninformed evolutionists would try to account for all of these problems by alleging that they are a result of “sudden mutations” which were passed along to offspring, the truth seems to be that they are often the result of illegal miscegenation (historically, in a family and in defiance of YHWH’s Torah).  In nature, offspring with these deficiencies would not survive (where survival of the fittest prevails). 

 

 

Man-made Acts 

 

Otherwise, it is additionally allowable that radiation injuries, poisoning from toxic chemicals, or some other stupid “man-made” act or action might cause some genetic damage or sudden mutation to some person or animal which affects their offspring. 

 

In a book on “The Language of Genes” (p. 80), Dr Steve Jones notes that genetic mutations have been caused by such things as hair dyes, black pepper, Earl Grey tea and pesticides. 

 

In the case of humans with damaged genes from an irresponsible man-made act (like radiation exposure, chemical poisoning, drinking alcohol and smoking by the mother during pregnancy or something else), problems can arise in children. 

 

However, it seems out of the question for this to happen naturally (apart from man-made causes) in nature among wildlife.  And if it should happen, one can be sure that it was probably a result of a dumb act of man. 

 

 

More on Survival of the Fittest 

 

Certainly, the previously noted “survival of the fittest” idea would not allow such mixed animals, birds and fish with damaged genes to survive and successfully reproduce in nature (with the alleged genetic mutations, or correctly with damaged-altered genes from miscegenation or whatever) since most would get sick and die or be killed by predators--without reproduction. 

 

Assuredly, deformed, diseased and weak offspring from damaged genes are going to become quick prey for predators, unless man has upset nature and irresponsibly killed all of the predators off (which is one of the problems today). 

 

Some earlier comments allowed that when man upsets the balance in nature (like killing all the deer bucks off in a given specie and geographical area), animals (females) will sometimes take a mate from a different, but yet similar specie.  This usually produces a sterile offspring (like a fawn) which won’t reproduce. 

 

But whether such crosses can reproduce or not, the fact remains that these abnormal and unnatural crosses seemingly cannot survive in nature because they are inferior and would be instant prey for predators (unless man has killed all of the predators off to upset the created balance in nature, as just outlined). 

 

Anyone witnessing a mixed coyote and dog can quickly understand that in nature, such an unnatural aberration would not last long.  In other words, nature and the created wild natural orders are not normally going to allow a violation of Leviticus 19:19/Deuteronomy 22:9-11 to persist with life forms outside the purview of creation. 

 

 

Insects 

 

This discussion opens the door to the question of insects which survive after their population has been exposed to various pesticides.  As often happens, the survivors develop some genetic immunity to the used pesticides.  Such insects tend to survive, but with the altered genes.  This situation would be called a mutation.  With this alleged mutation, how can they survive? 

 

It appears that the insects that do survive and reproduce with the mutation (caused by man’s irresponsible actions) are basically not otherwise changed.  In other words, they still look the same, they still fly the same way and they still seek out their traditional food supplies. 

 

The only difference seems to be that they have acquired an immunity against a foreign agent that historically would have killed them.  It is probable that such an alteration does not fit into the category of a true mutation which would change the insect, as evolutionary scientists suppose. 

 

In other words, the bugs are designed by The CREATOR to have the ability to develop these immunities whenever they are exposed to a new environmental threat to their existence (just as humans can possess an immunity to certain diseases, based upon having that disease or being vaccinated for it). 

 

Other than the acquired immunity, the insects remain basically as they were created.  For their existence, the mutation meant nothing except survival.  The mosquito is still the same mosquito, but now having an acquired immunity like humans achieve in vaccines. 

 

 

Personality and Temperament

 

Beyond the fact that so-called White persons, with mixed genes, physically can show those genes and even manifest serious health problems because of them, there is another fall-out of the mixing condition. 

 

The Prologue of this study briefly touched upon the linkage between certain personality traits and different kinds of humans/humanoids.  One sees this phenomenon very clearly in relation to the major races.  Without repeating the former comments, a few more remarks will be shared to drive home the point. 

 

By all means, the questions of temperament and personality seem to come into play with the infusion of the different blood lines into various people. 

 

For example, take the case of many so-called Whites with mixed blood lines (which is correctly almost the entire Caucasian population).  Those with significant Negro genes can easily be big talking extroverts, feelers and perceiving types in temperament. 

 

This writer has known a number of people with heavy evidence of Black genes.  Many of these people are often dark in coloring, fat faced, big shouldered and excessive talkers.  Obviously, many of them seem to have some charisma (since they are strong extroverts and feelers) and can achieve some success in politics and religion--as preachers (some are even well known in the Christian Identity movement). 

 

Apparently, some genetic descendants of Cain can also be big talking extroverts.  It appears that the propensity for being big talkers especially surfaces in Black-Hamite mixes (to produce so-called “BS” artists, who can talk so successfully that they completely mesmerize, fool and sway gullible listeners.  Many modern, mixed Italians are experts with this genetic capability). 

 

Conversely, Mongoloids and Mongoloid mixes lean toward being introverts, just as was true with the original White stock. 

 

 

Creativity 

 

White people (and evidently the more pure Hamite stock) can be very creative--in terms of inventions, engineering and so forth.  Both Asians and Black Africans lack this creativity.  However, in fairness to Orientals, though they are not particularly creative, they can take technology and inventions produced by Whites and copy and reproduce them extremely well. 

 

This interesting fact of history is one of the reasons why the Asian economy is booming so well in the 20th and 21st centuries.  The Asians have not created much of their expertise (which has come from the White Christian West), but they have successfully copied it and have mass produced it efficiently and expertly.