PDA

View Full Version : 1st century middle eastern Genome?



John Doe
09-03-15, 17:11
http://dienekes.blogspot.co.il/2015/03/sveti-ivan-relics-middle-eastern-mid.html

Angela
09-03-15, 19:32
http://dienekes.blogspot.co.il/2015/03/sveti-ivan-relics-middle-eastern-mid.html

Well, I don't know about it being St. John the Baptist's bones; that's probably hype to get some funding. However, it certainly seems to be a first century AD complete genome from someone probably from the Middle East, and that's good enough for me!:smile:

I wonder if they're partnering with someone from one of the big labs to get all the juice out of it? Somebody e-mail Reich just in case he hasn't seen it!

Ed.I just found this 2012 article about it. What on earth is National Geographic waiting for?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120618-john-the-baptist-bones-jesus-christ-bible-bulgaria-science-higham/

John Doe
09-03-15, 19:44
Well, I don't know about it being St. John the Baptist's bones; that's probably hype to get some funding. However, it certainly seems to be a first century AD complete genome from someone probably from the Middle East, and that's good enough for me!:smile:

I wonder if they're partnering with someone from one of the big labs to get all the juice out of it? Somebody e-mail Reich just in case he hasn't seen it!

Ed.I just found this 2012 article about it. What on earth is National Geographic waiting for?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/06/120618-john-the-baptist-bones-jesus-christ-bible-bulgaria-science-higham/

In case Reich has yet to see this, I can email him, what's his email address?

Maleth
09-03-15, 20:36
"The bones turned out to be from a man who lived in the Middle East at the same time as Jesus, Higham said."


Do they already have dna? I noticed that in many of these articles they mention a geographical location but never specify haplogroups.

Fire Haired14
10-03-15, 05:53
They should be able to break down this guy's genetic affinities to more than 'middle eastern'. That's very broad. Although the middle east has probably changed since then, if this is John the Baptist he should be closest to the modern inhabitants of the Levant.

John Doe
10-03-15, 07:52
They should be able to break down this guy's genetic affinities to more than 'middle eastern'. That's very broad. Although the middle east has probably changed since then, if this is John the Baptist he should be closest to the modern inhabitants of the Levant.
I would like to see a comparison between this 1st century middle easterner and populations such as Ashkenazi Jews, to see if any sort of admixture outside the middle east in AJs is plausible, or if 1st century middle easterners were very much southern European like, aka not changing much since the Neolithic.

John Doe
10-03-15, 07:53
"The bones turned out to be from a man who lived in the Middle East at the same time as Jesus, Higham said."


Do they already have dna? I noticed that in many of these articles they mention a geographical location but never specify haplogroups.

I heard that they found some ancient Jewish corpses from Roman times and they belonged to the maternal haplogroups of H and W.

giuseppe rossi
10-03-15, 17:15
Good to see that!

UltraViolence
12-03-15, 02:51
this thread is stupid in some ways


in the middle ages, priests would literally go around claiming they had the bones of saints and martyrs making fighters, knights and normal people swear an oathe on them to act right or just to "promote" the church et.......

like one professor said "there were so many heads (skulls) of "John the Baptist" going around at the time they couldn't all possibly be the real McCoy."


this dead guy/specimen could literally be Anyone


WOW! a guy,from the Middle East, in the 1st century AD, buried in a church-that tells us NOTHING

as one poster said, it's probably hype to get funding and attraction noting more


no actual/self respecting scientist would t ever make such a claim based on such minimal and dubious evidence.


this is one of the worst threads I've ever seen on this site.


anyway, they didn't even say where they narrowed it down to where he came from exactly, or his age etc.....

they didn't even give the DNA results.

the fact that most of the bones in the collection, are animal bones and not even human, shows that there was some shady sh*t going on by the church back then, trying to pass animal bones off as the bones of humans or saints or martyrs etc....

Im surprised all the human bones belong to one single person/individual

LeBrok
12-03-15, 04:48
Most likely it is not the saint in question. Either way it is irelevent. Most importantly we will have a DNA sequence of Roman era Near Easterner, finally. I hope they will carbondate the bone to make sure.

UltraViolence
12-03-15, 09:31
Most importantly we will have a DNA sequence of Roman era Near Easterner, finally. when? they didn't give the DNA results in the article.
and this is from 2012...............

they never took it further to ever find out more