Environmental Influence Versus Heredity? (31 December 2015, 19 Tevet, 5776)
We received the following message from Martin Lightfoot:
I've taken the liberty of copying your revised haplogroup
tree chart and added the appropriate mutation / markers.
It can then be observed that:
P derived from R&Q loses mutation P36 & M207
K derived from P,M&L loses mutations M45,5,11
F derived from K loses mutation M11
It follows then that although purportedly the 'Y'
chromosome is passed on father to son unchanged these
mutations / markers are lost.
Is this a correct interpretation of your chart?
If so, how might this interpretation of haplogroups fit our
Israel identity message?
The Conventional depiction of male transmitted YDNA goes according to alphabetical order A, B,C, D, E,... etc. As it progresses it gets simpler.
It (says the theory) all began with A still found in Bushmen etc of Africa.
Followed by B pygmies etc of Africa
Also followed by C and F.
C gave rise to Australian Aborigines, Maoris, Ainu, etc
D and E developed from C.
D are Japanese (from the "Jomon" half) and Tibetans.
E are Negroid Africans and most African Americans (E3a),
as well as North African Whites, Southeast Europeans, and 20% of Ashkenazic (European) Jews (E3b).
F (which with C developed from A and B) is still found in small numbers in Indonesia, Middle East, North America.
F gave rise to G H I J and K which split aside.
G (East Europe and Asia), Caucasus, Levant.
I (Scandinavians, Germany, Anglo-Saxons, Balkans),
J include about a third of the Jews, Turks, Kurds, many Caucasians, and some elements in Balkans etc.
K gave rise to L, M, and P which split aside.
L and M are Indonesia and much of Southeast Asia with L also present in India and Middle East.
P (Asia and South America) gave rise to N, O, Q, R.
N Finland, Russia, Siberia.
O Chinese, Koreans and the Yayo (ruling group) Japanese who are not D.
Q is Asia and North Amerindians.
R Slavs and some "Aryan" Indians (R1a), Celts and West Europeans (R1b), Cameroon Africans, some Australian Aborigines.
We say that in evolutionary terms R and Q are the original whereas the earlier letters are devolutions from R.
In non-evolutionary terms each letter represents an expression of adaptation to environment emanating from an inbuilt mechanism present in all peoples.
The Conventional scenario is evolutionary.
Advocates of evolution have an Edomite complex.
There therefore assume that.
primitive people have primitive DNA, developed peoples are more complex. Developed peoples, they say, evolved from primitive ones.
Our revised scenario shown by the illustrations is probably closer to reality than the conventional depictions.
It always helps to be correct.
"Words of truth are noticeable" says the Talmud.
We hold that different haplogroups etc., represent the expression of Genetic Potential in response to environment and genetic factors.
We believe in adaptation to environment albeit to a limited degree and according to an inbuilt adaptative mechanism.
This is not evolution, far from it.
Nevertheless it does take account of environment influence and the consequent inheritance of adaptations.
Paradoxically conventional science rejects this at the conceptual level.
As much as they hold to evolutionary theory for some reason or other they are afraid to accept it in practical terms.
Our re-arrangement of YDNA progression helps emphasize our non-evolutionary approach at the macro level.
Let us go through all the major YDNA lines.
A and B are in hot climates of Africa. The Bushmen may have been pushed southward in historical times.
C peoples are quite different from each other BUT they are all in approximately the same portion of the globe, apart from the Ainu.
The Ainu are C and the Jomon Japanese are D. They are quite different but they are in the same area even though the Jomon came at a later date OR maybe BOTH the Jomon and Ainu came together from the same region as the Tibetans?
It could that they all came from the one region in Tropical Southeast Asia?
E groups are all black Africans apart from E1b1b which is basically white. E1b1b is spread widely BUT its main concentration is along the north and south shores of the Mediterranean and away from the Atlantic.
Color does not necessarily reflect ancestry!!!!
The somewhat complicated language of the Abstract below tells us that different types of mice in a specific area change their coloring in accordance to the environment. They change their coloring in the same way even though they are not related to each other. A certain type of mice in one area may be of the same type as that somewhere else but his coloring could be different. His coloring in effect could be the same as that of other mice in his same region who from other considerations may be of an entirely different type.
Race Confounded! Similar Appearance versus Ancestry
It is also claimed that distance from sub-Saharan Africa is the sole determinant of human within-population phenotypic diversity, while climate plays no role.
G is a widely spread minority haplogroup but most concentrated in the Caucasus.
The Caucasus region itself consists of different sections with differences in climate and vegetation.
A separate DNA study has shown that the YDNA within the Caucasus is differentiated from region to region according to changes in environment.
Hum Biol. 2014 May;86(2):113-30.
Human paternal lineages, languages, and environment in the caucasus.
Tarkhnishvili D1, Gavashelishvili A1, Murtskhvaladze M1, Gabelaia M1, Tevzadze G2.
# The analysis showed significant associations of (1) G2 with wellforested mountains, (2) J2 with warm areas or poorly forested mountains, and (3) J1 with poorly forested mountains. R1b showed no association with environment. Haplogroups J1 and R1a were significantly associated with Daghestanian and Kipchak speakers, respectively, but the other haplogroups showed no such simple associations with languages. #
It may be linked with relatively mild climates and areas that historically were probably forested.
J2 Italy, Greece, Anatolia, Caucasus, also amongst Jews (ca. 20% but ca. 80% of Cohens). In the Caucasus it was linked with warm areas or poorly forested mountains.
J1 in the Caucasus was linked with poorly forested mountains. J1 is concentrated amongst Arabs who are natives of the desert and sparse vegetation.
We have here a correspondence between YDNA and environmental influences.
H is concentrated in India. It is possessed by about 28.8% of Indo-Aryan castes who are otherwise dominated by R1a.
It cuts across racial barriers within India. This could however be attributed to miscegenation.
I and J are more or less one and the same.
J1 (Arabs) as seen from the Georgian study is determined by desert areas.
J2 as seen from the Georgian study is determined in the Caucasus it was linked with warm areas or poorly forested mountains.
J2 (Jews, Kurds, etc) is like the Arabs (J1) but less so, i.e. semi-arid borderline areas.
I is related to J but in areas that are wetter and colder and by the sea.
G,H,I,J,K are all located between F and L,M,P. K is a minority variant found in Northern Europe and also (as K2b1a) amongst Australian Aborigines (ca. 27%) and New Guinea (more than 50%) in some areas.
The K2b lineage is found in Polynesia, Melanesia, Australia, Borneo, and Philippines among primitive peoples. They are concentrated in one geographical region but intermarriage may also be a factor, though we doubt it.
L and T seems to be K in warm wet mountainous regions.
P is a sub-branch of K and is concentrated in Central Asia with some (ca. 10%) in Timor which may represent a later migration.
Q Mongolia, Siberia, or people who originated in those areas.
R is a large widely spread group. R1b is mostly in the west with its highest concentrations in regions adjacent to the Atlantic ocean. Includes both white and black peoples.
R1a is to the east.
There is a correspondence between YDNA haplogroups and environment. In some cases this is very strong and indisputable. In other instances the relationship may not be so certain but still lies within the boundaries of a strong possibility.
It is not enough just to nullify existing conceptions.
One also needs to propose a hypothesis in their place.
Heredity definitely is a factor but so is environment.
How do these two factors interrelate with each other?