BAMAD no.65

 DNA and 
 Anthropology Updates 

Updates in DNA studies along with Anthropological Notes of general interest with a particular emphasis on points pertinent to the study of Ancient Israelite Ancestral Connections to Western Peoples as explained in Brit-Am studies.


The Brit-Am Rose
Official Symbol of Brit-Am


BAMAD no. 65
Brit-Am Anthropology and DNA Update
14 December 2009, 27 Kislev 5770
Brit-Am Anthropology and DNA Update
1. Video: Murder of albinos in Tanzania
2. Brit-Am DNA Opinion Shared by Others. We are not Alone!
Leading Linguistic-Anthropology Scholar Holds Outlook on DNA "Evolution" similar to that of Brit-Am
3. Comment on the Brit-Am DNA Service Proposal

Site Contents by Subject Home
Site Map
Contents in Alphabetical Order


This Site

1. Video: Murder of albinos in Tanzania

2. Brit-Am DNA Opinion Shared by Others. We are not Alone!
Leading Linguistic-Anthropology Scholar Holds Outlook on DNA "Evolution" similar to that of Brit-Am
(1) Background: The Opinions of German
Dziebel as Compared tot hose of Brit-Am and Conventional DNA Science
(2) Letter from
Cristian Sildan Drawing our attention to the opinions of German Dziebel
Wikipedia Sources Explaining the Distribution of Y DNA Haplogroups C and Q
(4) Extracts from Correspondence by German
Dziebel Outlining His Views
(1) Background: The Opinions of German Dziebel as Compared to those of Brit-Am and Conventional DNA Science
See diagrams.
Y chromosome (transmitted only be males) DNA haplogroups as explained by conventional science give a progression in alphabetical order.
A is the simplest, R one of the most complicated ergo R evolved from A.

Brit-Am reverses the procession and says that R could just have easily have been the first and others evolved from it by a simple process of simplification, of discarding superfluous information.

A Russian born scholar named German Dziebel has proposed something similar.
German Dziebel specials in a multi-disciplinary approach to anthropology and linguistics.
He says in effect that haplogroups C and Q are twin brother groups from the same source and that other groups are later developments.
Haplogroups C and Q are both found together in the same Na-Dene populations. The Na-Dene are an Amerindian linguistic group found in A|aska, Western Canada, and in the south including the Navajo and Apaches. It is related to some of the native languages of Siberia.
Conventional science puts Q and C as being very distant from each other, C being what is considered an early type and Q one of the latest.
German Dziebel says that in effect Q is a direct offshoot of C without having passed through any intermediate stages.
This corresponds with the Brit-Am outlook since R is close to Q and we propose that R was a very early development with groups evolving
(through simplification) from it rather than it evolving from them.
Conventional science puts Q and R as both offshoots of P and the latest to evolve whereas C is considered amongst the earliest.

The understanding of German Dziebel in our opinion is not that far from that of Brit-Am.
This was brought to our attention by an e-mail of Cristian Sildan shown below,

(2) Letter from Cristian Sildan Drawing our attention to the opinions of German Dziebel
Cristian Sildan: DNA

Dear Yair,


I've followed your work for some time, and you might be up to something.

So far, it seams the DNA is probably the biggest issue about the biblical origins of people.

Have you followed the Dienekes blog lately?

There's this article about the y-haplogroups, and in the commentaries there's this guy German Dziebel who apparently works with people from Princeton like Underhill and Rosenau, and they appear to be of the opinion that in fact it's the Q haplotype that would be the oldest, with C following. They might be up to something, maybe you should dig into that. As for me, I don't know, I'm no specialist and I wait for the future to see more clearly.

But hope it helps.

Have a nice day.

(3) Wikipedia Sources Explaining the Distribution of Y DNA Haplogroups C and Q

Distribution of C
Haplogroup C attains its highest frequencies among the indigenous populations of Mongolia, the Russian Far East, Polynesia, Australia, and at moderate frequency in the Korean Peninsula and among the Manchus, it displays its highest diversity among modern populations of India, and therefore it is hypothesized that Haplogroup C either originated or underwent its longest period of evolution and diversification within India or the greater South Asian coastal region.

It is believed to have migrated to the Americas some 6,000-8,000 years before present, and was carried by Na-Den?speaking peoples into the northwest Pacific coast of America.

Haplogroup C contains the polymorphism, very common in Central Asia, which is believed to be that of Genghis Khan, spread wide during the Mongol Empire's conquest of Eurasia.

The distribution of Haplogroup C is generally limited to populations of northern Eurasia, eastern Eurasia, Oceania, and the Americas.

Distribution of Q

This haplogroup contains many Siberians, Central Asians, and indigenous peoples of the Americas. Haplogroup Q Y-chromosomes are also found scattered at a low frequency throughout Eurasia.[1]

(4) Extracts from Correspondence by German Dziebel Outlining His Views
German Dziebel said...

Apparently, now Underhill admits the possibility that E could have returned to Africa from Asia. Also, how could America have been peopled by one of the youngest haplogroups (Q) and one of the oldest haplogroups (C), with the oldest found in the North, mostly among Na-Dene-speakers as well as among the Inuits? N and O are phylogenetically between C and Q, and they are found in regions adjacent to America. How come they aren't found there? The sister clade of Q, namely R, has a very wide geographic distribution in Eurasia and Africa. If America was peopled only 15,000 years ago, how come a sister clade of Q was in Europe at 45,000 YBP? The supposedly oldest lineages, A and B, aren't found outside of Africa: why weren't they carried out as a result of a population expansion? How come the youngest haplotypes, Q and R, have the widest geographic distributions, while the oldest haplogroups, with tens of thousands of years to spread around, are so narrowly distributed? At the next phylogenetic level, C and D aren't found in Africa, it means they arose outside of Africa. So where's the connection between Africa and the rest of the world?
Despite the slew of genetic publications the phylogenies remain fishy and ad hoc. I suspect the order of mutations is simply wrong.
Saturday, November 21, 2009 6:02:00 AM

Q and C represent the oldest split in the human Y-DNA phylogeny. If we look at their distribution, they have the two largest geographic spreads: from West Siberia to Tierra del Fuego and from American Southwest to Australia. Plus, interestingly enough, their geographies are complementary: Q is all over America and it juts out into Northern Asia, C is all over East Asia and Australasia and it juts out into North America. So, apparently C branched off Q somewhere on North America or North Asia. Notably enough, C and Q occupy the territories marked with the greatest levels of linguistic diversity, which confirms the antiquity of these haplogroups.
All other
haplotypes show geographic shrinkage, especially D, A, B, H (in India, with a subsequent Roma offshoot in Europe), and L. This indicates that they are derived lineages, which formed during a long period of isolation, genetic drift. Then they reexpanded
but didn't have enough time to achieve the geographic range of Q and C. Linguistic diversity in these areas is low again suggesting a shallow time depth.

3. Comment on the Brit-Am DNA Service Proposal
RE: Brit-Am Now no. 1425

Hi Yair - think that the DNA Service would be fantastic - Shalom J Botha
South Africa

(b) A Brit-Am DNA Service?
A suggestion has been made that Brit-Am offer a DNA Service. We would team up with a DNA Testing Laboratory. They would do the tests and supply the results. We would explain the results from a Brit-Am Lost Ten Tribes point of view. We would also check the results for associated clustering. In many cases we would be able to tell testees if they probably related to Ashkenazi or Sephardi Jews, Irish Ancestral Groupings, in some cases Scottish clans,  or other ethnic groups. In some cases we could tell people what regions or family groups (even family names) they probably descend from or at least are closely related to, etc.

At the moment no definite steps have been taken in this direction but one never knows.
It could be claimed that the relevant information could be supplied by anyone who knows a little about DNA and is active on the Web.
This may be so but one could say the same about most things.
 We could probably add a little edge of our own that for many would be well worth the expenditure.
Also the whole procedure may require much more effort, energy, expertise, and acceptance of responsibility and obligation than one would think.

BAMAD Archives

Join the Brit-Am Ephraimite Discussion Group
Just Send an
with "Subscribe"
in the Subject Line

Main Page

Offerings and Publications

Return to
Question and Answer
Table of Contents