Mules are a cross between horse and donkey.

Some readers already know that pigs can be used for organ transplants into humans, even though they are not Primates. Why that species, and not other Artiodactyls? Why not cows, for instance? McCarthy is hard at work calculating what percent of human ancestry is from pigs, and it may be revealed in an upcoming book.  

The DNA percentage he calculates needs to be divided against the DNA percentage that the first chimpanzee already shared with pigs before the first hybridization. That would be the only logical way to analyze the data. It would be embarrassing for McCarthy if he doesn’t do this when his book comes out. His work would be seriously set back by peer review.

This brings us back to the Big Picture Chart, and I’m going to have to take a guess, which is in red. The scientific method abhors guesses, but I have no choice because chimpanzee and pig genomes apparently have not been compared to determine what percent of DNA that they share. This particular comparison is mission-central to McCarthy’s work, and to valid peer review. A good hypothesis is one that shows where additional research is needed.

THE BIG PICTURE, WITH PIG ANCESTOR ADDED

1.   99.9% = humans of different races (note 1)
2.   99.7% = humans and Neanderthal
3.   98.8% = humans and chimpanzees
4.   98.4% = humans and gorillas
5.   98.0% = humans and pigs (note 2)
6.   96.9% = humans and orangutans
7.   90% = humans and cats
8.   85% = humans and mice
9.   84% = pig ancestor and chimpanzee (guestimate)
10.   84% = humans and dogs
11.   80% = humans and cows 
12.   73% = humans and zebrafish

Note 1: African Pygmy and New Guinea natives are the most different genetically, even though they look similar

Note 2: Pigs are Artiodactyls, not Primates. 

Have modern pigs picked up some ape genes from the hybridization process? McCarthy is clear in his writings that the hybridization and gene flow went only in one direction, from the Artiodactyl line into the Primate line, to create humans. He says there was no gene flow from the Primate line into the Artiodactyl line, to create modern pigs. He doesn’t publish any evidence to back up this claim. He just states it. That’s not good science, but let’s give him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps he did research it, and he just didn’t publish the findings online. This is a weak area for McCarthy.

As a general rule Mammalian species in different Orders should have around 10% - 20% DNA difference, not 2%. I base this statement by looking at the numbers in the Big Picture Chart, for instance humans vs. cats, dogs, mice, and cows. The original hybridizing pig must have been some pig ancestor closer genetically to other Artiodactyls, not the modern Sus Scrufa.

I settled on a conservative guestimate that there was 84% shared DNA between chimpanzee (or chimpanzee ancestor) and the pig ancestor, and 16% different. The actual percentage could be higher, but a 16% difference is a totally reasonable guestimate, while 2% is completely unreasonable.

This brings us to the toughest area of my review of McCarthy’s work. If chimpanzees and the pig ancestor were 16% different, but humans and pigs are only 2% different, that implies that something more is going on with the gene flow than McCarthy is suggesting.  

Perhaps the above chart explains all the anatomical features which McCarthy documented that we share with pigs? During the Macroevolution process, the Primate Human line went from being about 16% different from the pig line, to being only 2% different. That’s eight times in one direction. Looking at the data this way is disturbing, but true science is not about rejecting something just because it’s disturbing.

Next question, what process allowed the percent of non-pig DNA to reduce from 16% before the first hybridization, to only 2% in modern humans. One way would be if the evolving human line actually backcrossed (the successive generations) with pigs instead of chimpanzees. McCarthy went into great lengths to explain why the backcrossing was with the chimpanzee. It might be more complicated than this.

First, McCarthy says there was one hybridization, but perhaps there were multiple hybridizations, separated by tens of thousands of years, with each one back-crossing into the evolving human line. With each hybridization, that original 16% of non-pig DNA in the evolving Primate line would reduce a little bit. Perhaps there were between 4 and 10 steps, with each new species undergoing a partial Stabilization Process, and then hybridizing again with pig tens of thousands of years later. After many crossings over perhaps 2 million years, the non-shared DNA reduced all the way to 2%.

First generation hybrid, before back-crossing with the Primate Human line

I then created a simplistic family tree which allows for the percent of non-pig DNA to decrease from 16% before the first hybridization to 2% in a modern human. Once again, the starting point is the assumption that, prior to the first hybridization, these two species in different Mammalian Orders already shared 84% of their DNA. 

This chart is not from McCarthy’s research. I created it, and it is not correct for reasons that I will explain very soon. This chart is needed to follow a line of logic that is reasonable, and which leads to something that is more credible. Before I explain why the above chart is deficient, let’s first address the problem of the chimpanzee’s hands being so similar to ours. Wouldn’t all the repeated hybridization with pigs create hands that are half-way between the two species, or perhaps mostly pig?

No, not necessarily. This could be a matter of natural selection, microevolution-style. Perhaps certain anatomical features of the apes were extremely advantageous for the new hybrid species, so these features were selected via the process of natural selection. Many individuals were born with more piglike hands and feet, but they did not prosper and reproduce. Those with “better” hands and feet were able to reproduce and pass on those genes. Perhaps the same is true for the teeth and jaws.

Every student of biology knows about that Mendel guy and his experiments with peas. https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/heredity/mendelian-genetics-ap/a/mendel-and-his-peas Mendel’s work is still valid, and it could have been a major factor in human evolution.

If so, our hands and feet, and our teeth and jaw structure, passed on from chimpanzee to human without much change in the pig direction. These are the features that humans have which are the most chimp-like, and the least pig-like. McCarthy does document some change in the pig direction for hands and feet.

However, as I look at the family tree I made, the numbers still don’t make sense. The big picture DNA comparison chart is still the sounding board. The numbers aren’t making sense because we are still a 98.8% DNA match to a chimpanzee, despite the introduction of so much pig DNA. Why are we so close by DNA to two species in two different Mammalian Orders?

Therefore, the family tree that I illustrated above doesn’t tell the whole story. It’s wrong. The readers need to understand the thought process, each step of the way. Otherwise, the next section won’t make sense.

THOSE HORRIBLE ENTELODONTS

The family tree and the numbers make sense only if some ape DNA had earlier worked its way into some pig ancestor, so that the pig is actually a hybrid species. Perhaps the original Artiodactyl hybridizing with the chimpanzee was not the modern pig, Sus Scrofa, but instead a more extreme ancestral species, like an Entelodont. https://eartharchives.org/articles/terminator-pigs-rise-of-the-entelodonts/index.html. Is it possible that this hideous creature, standing seven feet tall at the shoulder and weighing over 2000 lbs, could be a human ancestor? Good grief.

Entelodonts were alive at the same time as ancient pigs, but may or may not be their direct ancestor. Some scientists are firm that they are related to pigs, but not ancestral. However, those same scientists are old-school, and don’t accept McCarthy’s concept of Macroevolution. The fossil record on the ancestry of Sus Scrufa is incomplete, and officially unknown. 

ENTOLODONT, an extinct “hell pig” that once roamed the Earth

Chimpanzee skull (I don’t have a Nyanzapithecus skull depiction to show) 

Australopithecus skull

Homo Erectus skull

Neanderthal skull

Homo Sapiens skull with high forehead, and with prognathism (forward reach of the jaw)

Homo Sapiens skull with low forehead. “Porsmose Man” from Denmark

Represents the Middle Neolithic Funnel Beaker population 

Homo Sapiens skull, without prognathism

Best example of an Anatomically Modern Human (AMH), showing large vertical forehead and zero prognathism

3.  Pigs have macro-evolved from the more ferocious Entelodont. Modern pigs have an ancestral Entelodont species which I estimate to be a more distant 84% DNA in common with chimpanzee. There was at least one or two hybridization events in which Primate DNA infused into the former Entelodont species. Their descendant, Sus Scrufa (pig), is much closer with Primates than other Artiodactyls are with Primates. Where’s the evidence to support this? For starters, cows share 80% DNA with humans, but pigs share 98%. 

If pigs are a hybrid species, then pig anatomy should reflect this, and it does. Pigs have larger and more complex brains than other Artiodactyls, and they lack the stomach structure of ruminants. A list of anatomical features that pigs share with chimpanzees, but are lacking in other Artiodactyls, needs to be researched and listed. I am putting forth a hypothesis, and I am showing what research is needed to either kill it, or validate it.  

Without any doubt, McCarthy and other experts in biology and anatomy could put me to shame on this angle of research. McCarthy could create a much longer list, but his research hasn’t moved in this direction. 

4.  The stabilized ancestral form on the Artiodactyl line, the small Entelodont, went extinct. Sus Scrufa itself has been a stabilized species for over a million years. Gene flow from Primates into Sus Scrufa is no longer occurring. Instead, Sus Scrufa has contributed gene flow into the evolving human line multiple times, and each time the human ancestor’s skull shape become less ape, and more pig.

5.  The stabilized ancestral forms on the Primate line, the chimpanzee and the bonobo, are not extinct. They continue to exist in Africa. They are very similar to Nyanzapithecus, perhaps with only Genus-level microevolution changes. Apes are virtually changed from their fossil ancestor, which some scientists say lived in Europe. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2132026-our-common-ancestor-with-chimps-may-be-from-europe-not-africa/ Our last common ancestor with the chimpanzee had a geographical range that broadly overlapped the pig and pig ancestor’s range. Southern Europe fits the bill. So does Turkey and Iraq. 

6.  The most recent hybridization between the pig line and the human line back-crossed only with the human line, and produced the Neanderthals. Southern Europe, Ukraine, Turkey, and Iraq are all places where Neanderthals lived. Many humans continue to carry strong Neanderthal characteristics. These show up as a “shadow race” which I describe later in this article. 

7.  Anatomically modern humans (AMH) developed separately from Homo Erectus or Homo Heidelbergensis without additional genetic input from the pig line, and most likely achieved modern neotenous form in East Africa. We have spread and prospered, and we have come to genetically overwhelm the Neanderthals, as well as various other lesser-known archaic human lines in Africa and Eurasia. Here’s one of them: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/feb/12/scientists-find-evidence-of-ghost-population-of-ancient-humans 

8.  Pig and cow DNA, and perhaps other Artiodactyls, all need to be compared to both chimpanzee and human DNA. Let’s see if the data points substantiate the Converging Species Hypothesis. There are many varieties of pig, and they all need to be sequenced and compared to human DNA to see which is closest. Will pigs be shown to be much closer than other Artiodactyls are to chimpanzees? If so, that’s proof of the Converging Species Hypothesis. A valid hypothesis is one that asks for research which could potentially discredit it. 

My strong recommendation is that we humans stop the macroevolution process, and cease to mate with pigs. The two species should not converge. Any further convergence is an abomination. 

African Palm Civet, a basal form of the Carnivora Order

Theologians are clear that the nature of original sin is something that is irreversible, and which carries on for all of humanity, for all time. That has been the teaching for thousands of years, since Moses wrote the Book of Genesis. The only attributes of humanity which carry on for all time are genetic. It sure looks like original sin is something genetic. Science is validating something in The Bible. That’s amazing. 

BLOOD TYPES ARE THE BEST PROOF OF THE HUMAN HYBRID HYPOTHESIS

Let’s continue with my review of the Macroevolution website, www.macroevolution.net. McCarthy listed various anatomical proofs that humans are partly descended from pigs, but he doesn’t want to address the most obvious proof.

No primate species has any kind of Rh-negative blood, but all pigs have either A- or O- blood. The medical community has documented that human O-negative blood is nearly an exact match to pig O-negative blood, and that A-negative is considered to be an exact match. 

Perhaps McCarthy doesn’t want to do this because the implication is that the human racial group which has the highest percentage of Rh-negative blood has more pig ancestry than other races. That would be the White race, particularly people like myself and McCarthy who have mostly northwestern European ancestry. This is also the part of the world where blue and other light-colored eyes are most common. McCarthy does identify light-colored eyes as a pig trait.

McCarthy’s research documents that hybrid crosses typically have a face which looks more like the father’s, and a body which looks more like the mother’s. This is a central principle of his research. His website posts over 100 pictures of hybrid crosses illustrating this. Therefore, if humans have a distant male pig ancestor component, it would be the skull and face features of the pig that would be most represented, not the rest of the skeleton. Our skeletons do look more ape-like than pig-like, especially our hands.

HEMOLYTIC DISEASE IS A RELIC SPECIES BARRIER

Differences in Rh-positive and Rh-negative blood create a reproduction problem within the human species called Hemolytic Disease. https://www.chop.edu/conditions-diseases/hemolytic-disease-newborn Doctors have long advised that an Rh-negative woman should not have children with an Rh-positive man, because it causes severe medical problems to their children. These problems get worse with each childbirth. In past generations, couples hoping to marry would take a “blood test” to see if they were compatible, or if Hemolytic Disease would affect their children.

Hemolytic Disease could be a relic reproductive barrier caused by the distant cross of two species from different Mammalian Orders. This condition has not been documented in any animal species, it’s only within the human species. Once our species is stabilized, with everyone either positive or negative, the disease goes away. 

McCarthy documents that our greatly decreased fertility is also proof that we are hybrids. A pregnancy occurs almost every time that animals mate, but humans are relatively infertile. It would be a serious problem if part of our natural biology was that a pregnancy resulted from every act of sexual intercourse. Could you imagine?

Rh-negative blood is most common in northwest Europe, and it decreases as one moves outwards geographically. This blood type is rare outside of the White race, and when found it basically means that the person has some White ancestry.  

I emailed McCarthy, and asked him to further investigate the blood type evidence, and to add a chapter to his website for blood types. He hasn’t done it. I suspect that McCarthy agrees, but he doesn’t want to go in that direction because it would make a controversial statement regarding human races. He’s also Caucasian with blue eyes. I wonder if he has Rh-negative blood? 

DARWINIAN THEORY IS RACIST AGAINST BLACKS

Darwinian Theory makes a racist statement against Black people, because the prognathism found in some (but not all) Blacks is a lesser version of the prognathism found in Homo Erectus, our most immediate ancestral species. Prognathism is the projection of the lower jaw. Go back to the skull images, and look again. The further one goes back in the evolving human lineage, the more prognathism exists in the fossil skulls. When one hears the term Scientific Racism, prognathism is at the root of it all.  

Science has been offending Blacks for 150 years by saying they are closest human race to other Primates, so now Whites can be offended if science says they are the closest human race to pigs. Equality has been achieved in the name of science, how about that. If science further pursues McCarthy’s research without researching if the White race is closest to pigs, that would count as a continuation of scientific racism and Eugenics. https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Eugenics-and-Scientific-Racism This cannot be tolerated. I’m calling them out now, in advance.

This article is just full of ironies. The name Eugene is at the root of the word Eugenics, and the name has a similar meaning. All evidence suggests that Dr. Eugene McCarthy is a good guy who believes in the equality of all people and all races. He is not a Eugenicist, even though his name is Eugene. He is putting forth a theory that challenges Darwinian Theory, which is racist to the core. Whether it’s his intent or not, McCarthy’s work is doing a lot to put an end to scientific racism. 

Some scientists tell Blacks to be proud that they are the first humans, and then snicker about it behind their backs. Think about this for a minute. They are saying that Blacks evolved from apes, and then they migrated out of Africa and developed into Whites and Asians. Whites and Asians are considered by the racists and Eugenicists to be the final and best product of evolution. Blacks should be offended by that. The hierarchy of races inherent in Darwinian Theory has long been the basis of Scientific Racism and all associated Eugenics. We fought a world war to end Eugenics. It’s way past time to discard it, because it’s becoming clear that all races developed from lesser forms. Whites are no exception, especially if the pig connection is true.

Over 120 years ago, scientists created the field of Craniometry to advance their racism, and then had to abandon and discredit the field after it was discovered that the “best” skulls are Blacks from East Africa who have vertical foreheads and zero prognathism, and some of the most “primitive” skulls are from Europe, at least by the standards of Craniometry. The Russian guy below is practically a Neanderthal.

THE SHADOW RACE PHENOTYPE

If McCarthy’s Stabilization Theory is correct as it applies to human ancestry, this means that every documented ancestral species spanning the gap from chimpanzee to Neanderthal was created by a pig form hybridizing with each prior Primate form. McCarthy doesn’t say this, and he doesn’t need to. It just flows from his work by connecting the dots. Based on the skull form and other anatomical features, it’s abundantly clear that Neanderthals had a higher percent of pig ancestry than modern humans. These pig characteristics became greatly diluted with the heavy gene flow of Anatomically Modern Humans into the Middle East and Europe. The blending of the two forms created the modern Caucasian race in Europe and the Middle East.

How do we test this hypothesis of multiple hybridizations? If pigs were continuing to hybridize with human ancestors, one would expect to see prognathism decrease with each step, and then for a beak-face with weak chins to appear. Pigs have the middle of the face projecting, with a huge nose and a weak chin. The skulls we illustrated shows that this is indeed the pattern, but only up to the Neanderthal. 

Some White people retain these latent Neanderthal features. Notice that people who have weak or receding chins often have a large nose, a sloped forehead, and a “beak face”. These features usually come together as a package, and sometimes with protruding ears:

THE SHADOW RACE PHENOTYPE:



• Weak or receding chin. Not all receding chins are weak
• Very large and long nose
• Heavily sloped forehead
• Protruding ears
• This creates a “beak-face” or “hawk-face” appearance

This phenotype is a major deviation from the AMH standard. It is a shadow race within the Caucasian, Arabic, and Native American races, and it sometimes appears among East Asians. The shadow race is in global decline, and no longer appears in pure form. The Mayan images below represent their actual appearance in ancient times. Mayans don’t look like this today, because the AMH population which they once subjugated has now infiltrated and outbred them. The White woman’s image proves that the Mayan phenotype is genetically possible. The same pattern is found among the Aztecs, which have also transitioned to a more AMH form. 

Below is an image of Attila the Hun, who exhibited the shadow race phenotype to such an extreme that he appears “dog-faced”. Nobody looks like Attila the Hun today, although this turn-of-the-century guy comes close. I had to research the second image, just to prove that Attila’s dog-face was historically possible. The coin is not stylized artwork, it was commissioned by Attila, and it represents his actual appearance. Note that Attila’s nose is not large and arched, and the distance from his nose to chin is much shorter than Ramses II. The dog-faced look is slightly different from the beak-faced look, but both are Shadow Race phenotypes.

The “Shadow Race” phenotypes are considered unattractive by modern western standards of beauty, and it’s been dying out due to sexual selection, and outright persecution. The two ethnic groups most likely to retain Shadow Race features, Armenians and Jews, are the same two ethnic groups subjected to genocides. That’s not a coincidence. The shadow race phenotype is common among the Basque as well, without the weak chin. They’ve also been persecuted for much of their history. 

The Shadow Race was often the ruling class of their societies, such as in Ancient Egypt and the Paracas culture of Peru. The Mayans were overthrown by the common AMH people, and their civilization declined. Common AMH people, with the help of the Spanish, overthrew the Aztecs. Common AMH people who were closer to Ethiopian by race eventually overthrew the Shadow Race pharaohs of ancient Egypt.

Notice how the shadow race can include East Asian peoples as well. Barbara Streisand and this Asia model look a lot alike racially, don’t they? Yet they are considered to be different races. The Shadow Race shows up in disparate places in Eurasia.

What remains to be explained is how the Paracas people arrived in South America and how their skulls, which are NOT even Homo sapiens in phenotype have the DNA of Caucasian Homo sapiens!

The elongated skull species evidently achieved civilization before Homo Sapiens, and they built upon multiple continents. These are the peoples who left huge stone structures around the world, which we lack the technology to duplicate today. Ancient peoples around the world emulated their appearance by elongated the skulls of children. Similar skulls have been found in Crimea and Russia, but it has not been determined that this is where these peoples originated. https://hiddenincatours.com/elongated-skulls-ancient-russia-black-sea-areas/  

Mainstream science and history do not want to investigate the connections of all these peoples, or their origins. There is apparently a DNA connection to the Caucasian race, although they are not Homo Sapiens without the sagittal suture. They would appear to be a link between Neanderthal and Caucasian.

ABUNDANT BODY HAIR

McCarthy makes the case that our body hair is something from the chimpanzee side. I don’t believe this is correct. Wild boars are quite hairy, and their hair is straight and coarse. Caucasians are the hairiest race, and their hair is straight and coarse. It’s not kinky like in sub-Saharan Africa.

Scientists have been assuming that Homo Erectus was hairier than we are, but that’s just a guess. Remember when I said that science doesn’t like guesses. What’s the evidence for that guess? There isn’t any, and some good facts run counter to it. It’s been theorized that human ancestors evolving in Africa developed sparse body hair as part of a set of genetic adaptations, including long legs and a thin build, to run down antelope over long distances. https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/why-humans-lost-their-hair-and-became-naked-and-sweaty That evidence is much more relevant than “Chimpanzees are hairy”, because it comes later chronologically. 

Sparse body hair is a feature naturally connected with humans in sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia. It’s entirely plausible that African versions of Homo Erectus and the Australopithecus species may have had even less body hair than a modern African. They developed into AMH humans. Perhaps the earliest humans in Africa looked a bit like this young lady. She has dark skin, no body hair, and is very skinny. 

Abundant body hair is centered around the Mediterranean Sea, and from Europe to northern India. The below map showing density of male body hair proves this. This generally overlaps the maps of other features associated with Sus Scrufa. Just connecting the dots here.