Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Regarding the evolution of blood types and time frames.
I was first responding to the claim that:

"The original human blood type was O (originating in Africa),
then came A with the development of agriculture (originating in
the Middle East, between 25000 and 15000 BC, and spreading west
into Europe), then came B with the development of herding
(originating in the western Himalayas, and spreading east into
China and India, between 15000 and 10000 BC), then came AB with
the fusion of A and B types, resulting from the first Mongol
invasion of Europe by Attila the Hun.
These are well established facts in anthropology."

Is this claim accurate?
There are several indicators that it is not accurate.
1st: Many published studies over recent years have shown that chimpanzees mostly have Blood type A, almost no Blood type O, but never Blood type B. The other great ape, the gorilla has Blood type B, almost no Blood type O, but never Blood type A. In these 'man-apes' species, said to be the ancestors of man, there is NO Blood type AB in either. Generally speaking, man has both Blood types A and B, and Blood type AB. Blood type O, in man is by far the most common in virtually every racial group.

What does this tell us? Well, EITHER humans have sexually interacted with chimpanzees and gorillas in the last 25,000 years (unlikely, according to evolutionary theory), OR blood types A and B BOTH existed in the common ancestors of humans, gorillas and chimpanzees. Since evolutionary theory holds that the split between these species occured MORE than 25,000 years ago....then the statement I was responding to must be incorrect. That is, blood types A and B are ancient.
Url for source data here: [www.bloodbook.com]

2nd: The same site, different link states: "As an example, the early European races are characterized by a very low type B frequency, and a relatively high type A frequency while the Asiatic races are characterized by a high frequency of types A and B." And frome the same site: the Ainu people (the aboriginal people of Japan) have 32% type A, 32% B, 17% O, and 18% AB; from this link: [www.bloodbook.com]

What does this mean? Well...the Ainu clearly did not develop their AB blood type from "a mongol invasion". And the non-Japanese people (who apparently came from Korea) have blood types 38% A, 22%B, 30% O, and 10% AB. They may have gotten the AB from the Ainu who preceded them -- but the Ainu CLEARLY were in Japan a long time ago. Their AB development is not likely to be "recent" -- therefore the claim that AB is a recent development is unlikely.

In fact, looking at the chart, it would appear that the Ainu were the originators of the AB blood type, as the prevalence of that blood type drops off in proportion to geographical distance from their location.

3rd: The original statement said: "The original human blood type was O (originating in Africa)". But looking at the 2nd link, blood type O is is pretty scattered. Peruvian Indians are 100% type O, Bororos (Brazil) are 100%, Mayas 98%, Navahos (American Indian) are 73%, and Eskimos (Inuit) are 54% type O. It is true that some African tribes have a lot of O (Sudanese 62%), but Bantus only have 46% O.
Added to the fact that gorillas and chimpanzees have VERY LITTLE type O, it not proven that type O necessarily originated in Africa. It is highly likely that it occurred after humans split from the line that produced gorillas and chimpanzees, but not necessarily in Africa.
And this site: [www.lexiline.com] states: "Given the above facts, blood types AB and O seem to be a combination of A+A, A+B or B+B (AB as exclusive and O as inclusive) - whereas A and B themselves appear to be separate original groups. Only if the father and mother are "A AND B" or "B AND A" blood type can the child then be born with any of the human blood groups A, B, AB or O. This negates current theory that O is the original blood type, especially since the man-apes have little or no O blood type and no AB blood type at all. A and B are very likely the originals."

Bottom line - evidence that AB blood originated from "a mongol invasion" in relatively recent history is HIGHLY UNLIKELY! And that was my point.

(Note: to be fair, this site: [www.bellaonline.com]
makes the exact assertion of the original poster, but the evidence does not appear to back up the assertion. Ever more foolishly, this site: [www.everyforkintheroad.org] even claims that "...with one of the types (AB) coming into existence as recent as sometime in the the 1800s". Considering how widely spread the type is, and the prevalence in the Ainu, Japanese, Chinese-Peking, Hindus (Bombay), Gypsies (Hungary), Kalmuks, and Koreans -- it CLEARLY did not occur "sometime in the 1800's". Nope.

QED.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 1659 Paul Cochrane 27-Feb-04 06:28
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 421 Anne-Marie 27-Feb-04 07:13
Moderator Note 405 Jaimi 27-Feb-04 21:17
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 405 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-04 12:32
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 466 Kboldt 27-Feb-04 14:00
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 411 fiascohoho 27-Feb-04 14:49
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 428 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-04 15:10
D'Adamo... talk about synchronicity 475 ananda 27-Feb-04 16:33
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 387 fiascohoho 27-Feb-04 16:35
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 630 SunSword 27-Feb-04 18:36
Need source for your claim 440 ananda 27-Feb-04 18:57
Re: Need source for your claim 453 SunSword 27-Feb-04 22:19
No source or evidence? 466 ananda 27-Feb-04 22:44
Re: No source or evidence? 413 fiascohoho 28-Feb-04 00:10
Re: No source or evidence? 481 SunSword 28-Feb-04 00:40
Re: Need source for your claim 455 Zosimos 27-Feb-04 23:04
Re: Need source for your claim 441 ananda 28-Feb-04 00:44
Are you assuming... 358 ananda 29-Feb-04 20:15
Re: Are you assuming... 394 SunSword 01-Mar-04 14:39
Re: Are you assuming... 416 ArmchairObserver 01-Mar-04 15:50
Re: Are you assuming... 401 SunSword 01-Mar-04 17:23
Re: Need source for your claim 310 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 04:26
Blood Types 445 jameske 28-Feb-04 15:51
Re: Blood Types 443 Lee McGiffen 29-Feb-04 12:30
Re: Blood Types 343 jameske 29-Feb-04 14:40
Re: Blood Types 451 ananda 29-Feb-04 15:36
Re: Blood Types 426 jameske 01-Mar-04 14:09
Re: Blood Types 436 SunSword 29-Feb-04 18:15
Re: Blood Types 439 jameske 01-Mar-04 14:03
Re: Blood Types 414 Paul Cochrane 01-Mar-04 03:16
Re: Blood Types 457 Lee McGiffen 01-Mar-04 11:32
Re: Blood Types 750 Paul Cochrane 03-Mar-04 01:09
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 408 ArmchairObserver 27-Feb-04 16:15
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 427 ananda 27-Feb-04 16:44
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 446 ArmchairObserver 27-Feb-04 17:40
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 425 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 04:48
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 480 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 04:43
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 436 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 04:18
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 437 Mark Staab 27-Feb-04 16:48
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 447 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 04:55
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 396 Mark Staab 28-Feb-04 05:43
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 433 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 06:22
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 453 Zosimos 27-Feb-04 17:01
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 417 Mark Staab 27-Feb-04 17:17
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 455 Zosimos 27-Feb-04 18:25
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 487 Mark Staab 27-Feb-04 19:53
Mod remark 446 Kees 27-Feb-04 20:13
Re: Mod remark 473 Mark Staab 27-Feb-04 22:08
Re: Mod remark 395 Zosimos 27-Feb-04 22:36
Re: Mod remark 414 Mark Staab 27-Feb-04 23:27
Moderator note 433 Jaimi 28-Feb-04 04:29
Re: Moderator note 419 Mark Staab 28-Feb-04 05:46
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 450 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 05:08
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 417 fisherman 27-Feb-04 17:41
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 426 Paul Cochrane 28-Feb-04 05:41
Belief, Proof and what does it matter 411 Elizabeth Newton 29-Feb-04 06:54
Re: Belief, Proof and what does it matter 399 fiascohoho 29-Feb-04 08:30
Re: Belief, Proof and what does it matter 425 Elizabeth Newton 29-Feb-04 11:52
Re: Belief, Proof and what does it matter 434 Elizabeth Newton 29-Feb-04 14:07
Re: Belief, Proof and what does it matter 437 fiascohoho 29-Feb-04 15:40
Re: Belief, Proof and what does it matter 439 Paul Cochrane 01-Mar-04 03:56
Re: Belief, Proof and what does it matter 402 Paul Cochrane 01-Mar-04 03:32
Re: Belief, Proof and what does it matter 434 Elizabeth Newton 01-Mar-04 15:00
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 440 Trygve Hogebol 29-Feb-04 18:37
Re: The shroud of Turin and synchronicity 365 Paul Cochrane 01-Mar-04 04:24


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.