Did Rh negative group origin as a trait of evolution or did it come with aliens or fallen angels, or as a slave race created by extraterrestrials or gods (the Sumerian Anunnaki)?
Posted by Fredsvenn on July 1, 2016
ABO and Rh blood type by nation
Historians and genetic researchers recently uncovered a possibility that the current human population stemmed from Homo Sapiens and another mysterious species which may have caused some people to have a Rhesus Negative or RH- blood type.
Eighty-five percent of the world’s population is RH positive. The remaining 15 percent, which are RH negative, are concentrated in Europe. This set of people generally has higher intelligent quotients and are predominantly Caucasians. Thus, there are theories that a species related to Homo Sapiens may have risen in Europe and may have mated with Homo Sapiens later. They could be the origin of Caucasians.
Alien researchers claim that creatures from outer space visited the Earth in the past. They mated with humans and produced RH negative people. According to this theory, RH is directly linked to Apes. The original group of RH negative people may have evolved from something else other than apes.
A biblical tale, set in modern-day Europe, tells a story of angels falling in love with humans and having children with them. The offsprings were called Nephilims. The Nephilim, described as pale, is compared to the Caucasians.
According to this theory, RH negative people embody strange qualities. This explains why the body of an RH positive mother rejects an RH negative child. A number of infant fatalities were attributed to this phenomenon.
Science dismisses the existence of RH negative people as a natural occurrence in the evolution process. RH is defined by Science as the presence of Antigen D. Those who are RH positive possess Antigen D in their blood. RH negative people do not have Antigen D in their blood.
Antigens are produced by the body to fight bacteria. If an antigen not produced by the body is introduced to it, it will treat the antigen as its enemy. According to Science, this is the true reason why the body of an RH positive mother rejects an RH negative child.
For the Human Race, there are four, primary, types of blood. They are A, B, AB, and O. The classifications are derived from the antigens of a person’s blood cells – antigens being proteins that are found on the surface of the cells and which are designed to combat bacteria and viruses.
Most of the human population have such proteins on their cells. They are the Rh positive percentage of the Earth’s people. Within the United States, current estimates suggest that around 85 percent of all Caucasians, roughly 90 percent of African Americans, and approximately 98 percent of Asian Americans are Rh positive.
The small percentage of the U.S. population (and that of the rest of the world, too, it should be noted) which does not exhibit the relevant proteins falls into a very different category, that of the Rh negatives.
Why one particular group of people should have blood that is so incredibly different to that of just about everyone else, is a matter of deep controversy. It is an issue that has led to the development of an astonishing theory: that in the distant past, visiting extraterrestrials subjected early, primitive, humans to advanced gene-splicing and cell–manipulating techniques; ostensibly to create a slave race. In doing so, they gave birth to the Rh negatives.
To demonstrate how incredibly different the Rh negatives are to the rest of the world’s population, we only have to look at the matter of pregnancy. For a pregnant woman who is Rh negative, the hazards can be considerable and dangerous. If a woman who is Rh negative is made pregnant by a man who is also Rh negative, the problems are non-existent and there is no need for concern: both individuals are wholly compatible with one another, the fetus will develop in normal fashion, and the child will be born Rh negative.
If, however, the father is Rh positive and the mother is Rh negative, that’s where the problems can begin and the results may prove to be very different – and tragically so, too – as the baby will be Rh positive. It is this latter issue that gets to the crux of the problem.
As incredible as it may sound, the blood of an Rh negative pregnant woman can be completely incompatible with the blood of an Rh positive baby she is carrying. Such a situation can very often provoke the mother’s own blood to produce potentially lethal antibodies which are designed to attack the fetus’ blood, if and when the former is exposed to the latter.
In other words, the positive baby is perceived by the mother’s negative immune-system as something hostile, something not quite as it should be. For all intents and purposes, the unborn child is considered something alien and something to be gotten rid of at the earliest opportunity possible.
More disturbing is the fact that the more times a woman becomes pregnant, the more powerful and prevalent the deadly antibodies become. In short, the mother’s body finds ways to make the process of trying to kill the fetus ever more powerful, swift, and effective with each successive pregnancy.
It’s almost as if there is something deeply ancient and non-human encoded in our DNA that sees positive and negative as being acutely different to one another, and never intended for unification. That may be exactly the case.
If we today – and particularly so the Rh negatives – are the product of extraterrestrial manipulation, then who, exactly, were the beings that decided to play god with the Human Race’s earliest forms? Why were they so intent on creating new and radically different kinds of people? Where did they come from? Are they still amongst us?
They are questions that lead us to a legendary, powerful body of entities that have become known as the Anunnaki. They are also questions that take us to the heart of ancient Sumerian cultures, which can be found in what, today, is southern Iraq, and which, historians and archaeologists believe, was first settled at some point between 5,500 and 4,000 BC.
According to Sumerian lore, more than 400,000 years before a huge deluge devastated the Earth and killed untold millions, this mighty race of legendary people came to our planet from the heavens above. During their time here, they brought some form of stability, and even society, to what were, originally, extremely primitive human tribes, some of which ultimately became the Cro-Magnons. That was not, however, the original agenda of the Anunnaki.
The primary goal of the Anunnaki was to genetically alter primitive humans to create a robust and strong entity that, effectively, amounted to nothing less than a slave race, one designed to do the bidding of their extraterrestrial masters – including mining the Earth for its supply of precious and priceless gold. When the Anunnaki finally left the Earth, they left behind them an astonishing legacy: a new form of human, one radically different to the rest: the Rh negatives. And they still live today.
The RH negative strain runs through the British Royal Family, something which has provoked controversial assertions that the Royals are not all they appear to be. An entire sub- culture exists suggesting the Royals are directly descended from an ancient order of human- like extraterrestrials that are the true, secret rulers of our planet.
Is there something in the genetic make-up of the Rh negatives that makes them born leaders, powerful figures, and perhaps not unlike the legendary “heroes of old” and the “men of renown,” as described in the pages of the Bible (and almost certainly Rh negatives, too)?
Do the Rh negatives amount to an underground army of human hybrids being carefully, and secretly, nurtured for reasons that might be nothing less than downright sinister and deadly?
If, one day, it is proved that a small percentage of the Human Race is not entirely human after all, will we see a backlash against the negatives? Will there be witch-hunts? Might there be calls to have the negatives isolated from the rest of society?
Could a form of “extraterrestrial racism” – born out of a fear that some of the negatives may be part of a sinister, alien agenda – develop both wildly and widely? Will we see the construction of countless “Extraterrestrial Guantanamo Bays?”
These are the kinds of intriguing and inflammatory questions that the many and varied mysteries of the Rh negatives provoke.
UFO researchers, astronomers, and NASA have spent countless years looking towards the heavens for the proof that aliens are amongst us. The strange saga of the Rh negatives, however, suggests strongly that it’s not to the stars that we need to look for proof that extraterrestrials really exist. It’s to us, the Human Race. In a strange, fantastic, and even ironic, fashion we – or, at least some of us, the Rh negatives – are the very aliens that we have for so long sought…
Did Rh- blood come from Neanderthals?
If the 35,000 number were right, then this wouldn’t be a bad guess. But that number is almost certainly incorrect. Rh- blood probably arose millions of years ago rather than tens of thousands.
Keep in mind that when I say Rh- here, I mean the form that is common in Europe. This is just one of lots of ways of being Rh-. This means there wasn’t some single event of outbreeding that explains all forms of Rh- blood. Lots of individual specific events have happened over our history.
And even if we do focus just on the form common in Europe, the 35,000 number still doesn’t work. This form predates modern humans settling down in Europe.
One of the big clues that this form of Rh- has been around for a long time is that it is the most common form in Africa as well as Europe. Now I don’t mean it is as common in Africa as it is in Europe. It isn’t. What I do mean is that even though being Rh- isn’t very common in Africa, if you have the blood type, then the most common way is the same in both Africa and Europe.
And don’t just take my word for this. Because there isn’t a lot of information out there about the evolutionary history of Rh- blood, I decided to consult one of the big names in the field, Dr. Bill Flegel of the National Institutes of Health. Here is what he had to say in an email when I asked about the 35,000 number:
35,000 years is very likely incorrect and too recent. The RHD deletion occurred in Africa, almost certainly before anyone migrated out of Africa. Keep in mind that the common RHD deletion worldwide is also *the* prevalent D negative RH haplotype in Africans today. How should that be, if the RHD deletion somehow occurred in connection with groups migrating out of Africa?
What this all means is that it is extremely unlikely that the common form of Rh- blood originated in Neanderthals and then spread into humans through breeding. It simply arose too long ago for this to be true.
This also means that even if we see evidence that Neanderthals had this form of being Rh-, that doesn’t mean we got it from them. A more likely explanation in that case is that we shared common ancestors who had the same form of Rh- blood in their blood.
I should mention that so far we don’t have any evidence either way about the Rh status of Neanderthals (although we do know that some of them had O blood type). The part of the DNA that is involved in Rh status is tricky to read and we haven’t yet been able to figure it out in Neanderthals. But again, even if we do see evidence of this form of Rh- blood in Neanderthals, this doesn’t mean we got it from them.
OK so Rh- blood almost certainly did not come from Neanderthals. It also did not come from aliens or anything else like that. Rh- blood is just another genetic variation like the ones that lead to red hair or blue eyes.
In fact, the gene involved in being Rh-, the RHD gene, is arranged so that DNA differences will spring up more often than in other DNA regions. This is why there are so many different ways to be Rh-.
So the tricky part isn’t explaining how the common Rh- form first arose. It is inevitable that this region of the DNA will turn Rh- every now and then. No the tricky part is explaining how something that can cause problems in pregnancy could become more common in Europe than elsewhere.
The most likely explanation is that being Rh- had some advantage in our past or maybe even today. Another possibility is that being a silent carrier might be useful. In either case, the advantage of being Rh- would outweigh the disadvantage of having problems with having Rh+ babies.
It is confusing that the Rh- blood type is as common as it is because it can have such profound effects. If an Rh- mother is pregnant with an Rh+ child, the child is at risk for something called hemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN). And each child she has afterwards is at a higher risk.
Nowadays a woman can be given a couple of RhoGAM shots to prevent these problems from happening. But even a hundred years ago this wasn’t an option.
From a biological point of view, if being Rh- had only this effect, then Rh- women should have fewer children. This means that the DNA that leads to being Rh- should be passed down less often. Over time, being Rh- should become less and less common and, perhaps, even disappear.
But this clearly has not happened in Europe. Around 18% of people of European descent are Rh- compared with 1-3% of Africans (see the table at the end of the answer for a more statistics like this). Something weird seems to be going on in Europe.
One possibility is that the Rh- people happened to settle together. If everyone has Rh- blood, then there is no disadvantage to having it. Two Rh- parents are at little risk for an Rh+ baby which means the baby is at little risk for HDN.
There do appear to be some areas of higher concentration in Europe. For example, the Basques of the Pyrenees between Spain and France are 35% Rh-. That is a lot but still, 65% of them Rh+ and nowhere else in Europe is the concentration so high. This means that this is probably not the explanation.
Another possibility is that there is some advantage to having Rh- blood and/or carrying a silent version of it in your DNA. The latter case would make it similar to sickle cell anemia.
People with sickle cell anemia used to die very young in life. This makes it hard to understand why it is so common in certain areas of the world.
The reason it persists is that if you carried a silent version of the gene, you were resistant to malaria. The 1 in 4 chance for the child of two carriers to end up with sickle cell anemia was not as high as the risk of the parents dying from malaria before having kids. So, over time, this gene spread through the population.
We haven’t yet found anything so obvious for Rh- blood but a recent idea is that it may protect from a parasite called Toxoplasma gondii. It doesn’t keep you from getting the parasite, but it might make the effects less severe.
Toxoplasma gondii affects people’s motor skills. For example, it seems to slow down people’s responses so they are more likely to get in car accidents.
A couple of recent studies showed that having one copy of Rh- and one copy of Rh+ protects someone from these effects. In other words, Rh+ people who carry a silent Rh negative copy of the RHD gene may do better in areas with lots of Toxoplasma gondii infections. Like in Europe, for example, where being Rh negative is much more common than other places in the world.
While we may not know the reason for the spread of the most common form of being Rh- in Europe, what we do know is that it did not suddenly appear in humans 35,000 years ago. Most likely it arose in Africa hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ago.
And what we also know is that Rh- blood will always be around because of how the RHD gene is set up in our DNA. Even if the most common form we have been talking about disappeared, a new Rh- form would take its place. Someone, somewhere will always be Rh-.