• Hap­logroup X a Mid­dle East and Euro­pean DNA mark­er found in North America
  • Hap­logroup X in DNA dis­tri­b­u­tion match­es Hopewell and Book of Mor­mon migra­tion, expanse and trade system
  • Leg­end of Fu Sang Chi­nese knowl­edge of the North Amer­i­can continent

Hap­logroups A, B, C, D, and X are found among the Indi­ans of the Amer­i­can con­ti­nents. Hap­logroups A, B, C, and D can be explained as com­ing from Asia, but not hap­logroup X, which is only found in North Amer­i­can Indi­ans. Oth­er North, Cen­tral, and South Amer­i­can Indi­ans show the Hap­logroups A, B, C, and D. Hap­logroup X is not found in Asia, it is found in Israel, Europe and North Amer­i­ca specif­i­cal­ly the Great lakes region by New York State.

Sci­en­tists believe that hap­logroup X crossed the Bering Ice Bridge some­time around 12000 and 30000 years ago. That belief is prob­lem­at­ic because there is no DNA evi­dence trail that hap­logroup X crossed the Bering land bridge. Apply­ing the same rea­son­ing that crit­ics use to con­clude that DNA dis­proves the Book of Mor­mon in Mesoamer­i­ca, you would also con­clude that hap­logroup X did not cross the Bering land bridge. There is no Native Amer­i­can hap­logroup X DNA found in Siberia, East Asia, or the west coast of Amer­i­ca, and it is com­plete­ly absent in Cen­tral and South Amer­i­ca. When look­ing at the hap­logroup X DNA dis­tri­b­u­tion map notice that it is not found in East Asia but in Europe and the Mid­dle East. There is a small group of hap­logroup X found in the Alta­ians of south Siberia but this sub­group of hap­logroup X is not relat­ed to North Amer­i­can Indi­ans and their arrival in the Alta­ians is after the Bering Ice Bridge would not have been crossable.

Third, the few Alta­ian (Derenko et al. 2001) and Siber­ian hap­logroup X lin­eages are not relat­ed to the Native Amer­i­can clus­ter, and they are more like­ly explained by recent gene flow from Europe or from West Asia”
Ori­gin and Dif­fu­sion of mtD­NA Hap­logroup X

What also makes hap­logroup X inter­est­ing is that it is a Euro­pean. Cau­casian DNA mark­er. The Cau­casian part is impor­tant to keep that in mind as you read the quotes about Native Amer­i­can tra­di­tions and stories.

Hap­logroup X is remark­able in that it has not been found in Asians, includ­ing Siberians”

In that case, as it has been pro­posed, hap­logroup X was brought to Amer­i­ca by the east­ward migra­tion of an ances­tral white pop­u­la­tion, of which no trace has so far been found in the mtD­NA gene pool of mod­ern Siberian/eastern Asian pop­u­la­tion” (The Pres­ence of Mito­chon­dr­i­al Hap­logroup X in Alta­ians from South Siberia Am. J. Hum. Genet. 69:237–241, 2001)

To date, hap­logroup X has not been unam­bigu­ous­ly iden­ti­fied in Asia, rais­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ty that some Native Amer­i­can founders were of Cau­casian ancestry.”


Over­all, the sequence data and phy­lo­ge­net­ic analy­sis sug­gest that the Native Amer­i­can and the Euro­pean hap­logroup X mtD­NAs share a com­mon mater­nal ancestor”

The 14 Cau­casian-Euro­pean hap­logroup X sam­ples (des­ig­nat­ed “CE1”–“CE14”) includ­ed 2 Cau­casians of Euro­pean ances­try” (MtD­NA hap­logroup X: An Ancient Link between Europe/Western Asia and North Amer­i­ca Michael D. Brown,1 Seyed H. Hosseini,1 Anto­nio Torroni,2 Hans-Ju¨rgenBandelt,3 Jon C. Allen,1 Theodore G. Schurr,1 Rosaria Scozzari,2 Ful­vio Cruciani,2 and Dou­glas C. Wallace1)

Phy­lo­ge­net­ic analy­sis and coa­les­cence esti­mates for Amer­i­can Indi­an and Euro­pean hap­logroup X mtD­NAs exclude the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the occur­rence of hap­logroup X in Amer­i­can Indi­ans is due to recent Euro­pean admix­ture.” (The Pres­ence of Mito­chon­dr­i­al hap­logroup X in Alta­ians from South Siberia Am. J. Hum. Genet. 69:237–241, 2001)

Near­ly one-third of Native Amer­i­can genes come from west Eurasian peo­ples with ties to the Mid­dle East and Europe (“Great Surprise”—Native Amer­i­cans Have West Eurasian Ori­gins http://​news​.nation​al​geo​graph​ic​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​2​0​1​3​/​1​1​/​1​3​1​1​2​0​-​s​c​i​e​n​c​e​-​n​a​t​i​v​e​-​a​m​e​r​i​c​a​n​-​p​e​o​p​l​e​-​m​i​g​r​a​t​i​o​n​-​s​i​b​e​r​i​a​-​g​e​n​etics/)

Anoth­er prob­lem with the Bering Ice bridge the­o­ry is that Poly­ne­sian DNA is found in South Amer­i­ca. The idea that Poly­ne­sians migrat­ed across the Bering Ice Bridge is ridiculous.

Researchers mapped sim­i­lar­i­ties in genes, muta­tions and ran­dom pieces of DNA of Cen­tral and South Amer­i­can tribes with oth­er groups. Warmer col­ors indi­cate the strongest affinities.”
(Pon­tus Skoglund, Har­vard Med­ical School). 

From the map below notice the lack of Asian pock­ets of DNA that cor­re­spond to South Amer­i­ca in Siberia and East Asia. But the larg­er con­cen­tra­tions found in the trop­i­cal and warmer cli­mates of South Asia. Why would any group of peo­ple migrate to the arc­tic sub­ze­ro tem­per­a­tures of Siberia and North East Asia from trop­i­cal and tem­per­ate cli­mates? Com­par­a­tive­ly very few peo­ple live in these arc­tic cli­mates the rea­son why these loca­tions are inhos­pitable to human life. There are large con­cen­tra­tions of the men­tioned DNA found in South Amer­i­can but notice the par­tic­u­lar DNA sam­ples being shown as evi­dence is not found in what is now Amer­i­ca and only one loca­tion in Cana­da. This evi­dence would sug­gest transocean­ic voy­ages to South Amer­i­ca. Below are quotes from arti­cles and research papers ques­tion­ing the Bering Ice bridge theory:

Native American Ancestry Map

The pre­vail­ing the­o­ry is that the first Amer­i­cans arrived in a sin­gle wave, and all Native Amer­i­can pop­u­la­tions today descend from this one group of adven­tur­ous founders. But now there’s a kink in that theory.”

If Aleut­ian Islanders or their ances­tors had some­how mixed with an Aus­tralasian group up north or made their way south to the Ama­zon, they’d leave genet­ic clues along the way. “It’s not a clear alter­na­tive,” argues Reich.”

Three Ama­zon­ian groups—Suruí, Kari­tiana and Xavante—all had more in com­mon with Aus­tralasians than any group in Siberia.”

Both stud­ies there­fore sug­gest that the ances­try of the first Amer­i­cans is a lot more com­pli­cat­ed than sci­en­tists had envisioned.”

There is a greater diver­si­ty of Native Amer­i­can found­ing pop­u­la­tions than pre­vi­ous­ly thought,” says Skoglund. “And these found­ing pop­u­la­tions con­nect indige­nous groups in far apart places of the world.”


Anoth­er valu­able point in show­ing incon­sis­ten­cies of the Bering land bridge the­o­ry is the Clovis/fluted spear point from Europe. This type of stone pro­jec­tile is believed to have been brought from the Euro­pean con­ti­nent to North Amer­i­ca via Bear­ing Ice Bridge. This spear point is found in Europe and North Amer­i­ca but not found in Siberia or East Asia. How was this spear point brought to North Amer­i­ca across the Bear­ing land bridge if it’s not found in Siberia and East Asia? Clo­vis spear points are found in plen­ti­ful sup­ply east of the Rocky Moun­tains but in such areas as Alas­ka and the Aleu­tians where there should also be evi­dence show­ing this sup­posed cross­ing there are a few spots in Alas­ka most like­ly brought from move­ment from the east coast. But noth­ing in the way of evi­dence show­ing a land migra­tion in Alas­ka or the Aleu­tians or East Asia or Siberia.

image015.jpg image016.jpg

I believe it can be shown that hap­logroup X and or the Jared­ites are inex­orably linked to this type of stone pro­jec­tile. The Clo­vis peo­ple are believed to have caused the extinc­tion of at least 25 gen­era of indige­nous land mam­mals found in North Amer­i­ca. To include hors­es, cat­tle, goats, and mam­moths (ele­phants) all ani­mals list­ed in the Book of Mor­mon. If the Jared­ites brought over the Clo­vis spear point which I believe they did the Nephites and Laman­ites even­tu­al­ly adopt­ed this type of spear point. Major stum­bling blocks to the his­toric­i­ty of the Book of Mor­mon can be shown to be false. I can only assume based on the evi­dence the cur­rent dat­ing of the Clo­vis peo­ple is wrong and the Clo­vis point was used and arrived with the Jared­ites. The cur­rent the­o­ry that this point arrived via the Bering land bridge with­out evi­dence proves this the­o­ry is in need of reex­am­i­na­tion. That can be said of world migra­tions to the Amer­i­can con­ti­nent also. The Clo­vis spear point map in my opin­ion is also indica­tive of the bat­tles between Nephites and Laman­ites fought in North America.

Orig­i­nal­ly the Bering Ice Bridge states that there was a sin­gle migra­tion as far back as 30000 years ago. But pop­u­la­tion expan­sion of North Amer­i­ca and diverse cul­ture and lin­guis­tics pop­u­la­tions found in North and South Amer­i­ca prove against this. Now the­o­rist are explor­ing the idea of two and maybe more migra­tions. I believe this is just the begin­ning of more the­o­ries to come. If atten­tion can be turned to holes found in the Bering Ice Bridge the­o­ry I believe the­o­ries that include trans-ocean­ic voy­ages from Asia to the Amer­i­can con­ti­nent will be unavoidable.

Sci­en­tists have used Anzick‑1 to show a genet­ic link between Siberia and North Amer­i­ca, but there are a cou­ple prob­lems with this hypoth­e­sis. Anzwic‑1 is hap­logroup D not X. It does not explain how hap­logroup X arrived in North Amer­i­ca. Based on genet­ic dis­tri­b­u­tion hap­logroup X and D, hap­logroup X is more close­ly asso­ci­at­ed to the large con­cen­tra­tion of Clo­vis and flut­ed points found on the east coast of Amer­i­ca of which hap­logroup D is almost com­plete­ly absent from. Also, what would appear to be the found­ing pop­u­la­tions based on the high con­cen­tra­tions of hap­logroup D is found in cen­tral and South Amer­i­ca – it’s not found on the west coast of North Amer­i­ca or in Alas­ka. The phys­i­cal evi­dence leads me to believe that hap­logroup D arrived by trans-ocean­ic voy­ages to Cen­tral and South America.

When Colum­bus reached the Amer­i­c­as in 1492, Native Amer­i­can occu­pa­tion stretched from the Bering Strait to Tier­ra del Fuego, Tor­roni explained. Those native pop­u­la­tions encom­passed extra­or­di­nary lin­guis­tic and cul­tur­al diver­si­ty, which has fueled exten­sive debate among experts over their inter­re­la­tion­ships and ori­gins. “ (First Amer­i­cans arrived as 2 sep­a­rate migra­tions, accord­ing to new genet­ic evidence)

The DNA and Clo­vis spear points not found in Siberia and East Asia brings the bear­ing Ice bridge the­o­ry to a halt. But there is also a large amount of evi­dence dis­prov­ing the time­line of a 15000BC to 30000BC time­line. The evi­dence will show there are cer­tain North Amer­i­can Indi­an tribes that have Hebrew beliefs, lin­guis­tics, arti­facts, tech­nol­o­gy and cul­ture that date to bib­li­cal times and not to 15000BC which would pre­date these tech­nolo­gies and beliefs. A great exam­ple are the Hopewell and Ade­na Indi­ans these cul­tures had an advanced met­al­lur­gy to include cop­per breast­plates, cop­per and sil­ver Jew­el­ry, mete­oric iron tools and weapons. The Hopewell and Ade­na had woven cloth and but­tons. The Hopewell had an advanced trade sys­tem that stretched for thou­sands of miles with a high­way sys­tem. It’s also worth not­ing that civ­i­liza­tions that had met­al­lur­gy, woven cloth and advanced trade sys­tem also had a writ­ten lan­guage. The old­est Hopewell arche­o­log­i­cal site is found in Flori­da at 500BC these Indi­ans dis­ap­peared around 400 AD in the Great Lakes region. These tech­nolo­gies, cul­tur­al and lin­guis­tic ties show that hap­logroup X arrived dur­ing bib­li­cal times by ship and not 12000BC to 30000BC through an arc­tic land migration.

The Hopewell Indi­ans have hap­logroup X DNA. The Ade­na cul­ture end also match­es the Book of Mor­mon. The Hopewell time­line geog­ra­phy and tech­nol­o­gy match­es the Book of Mor­mon per­fect­ly and makes them the per­fect civ­i­liza­tion to be the Nephites.

Hap­logroup X DNA dis­tri­b­u­tion is found on the east coast of Amer­i­ca with the high­est con­cen­tra­tion found in the Great Lakes and Cana­da region. It’s not found in South and Cen­tral Amer­i­ca and very lit­tle on the west coast of Amer­i­ca. Gen­er­al world migra­tion the­o­ry is that pop­u­la­tions would fol­low the coast line we do not see this with hap­logroup X. Sci­en­tist have point out dat­ing of hap­logroup X entry has been uncer­tain. Stud­ies have shown pop­u­la­tion expan­sion of hap­logroup X as stat­ed by sci­en­tist hap­pened dur­ing bib­li­cal times. One would assume that if hap­logroup X arrived as late as 12000BC pop­u­la­tion expan­sion would have hap­pened much ear­li­er than what the cur­rent the evi­dence shows. Some sci­en­tist have the­o­rized that hap­logroup X crossed 3000 miles over ice from Europe to Amer­i­ca across the Atlantic Ocean dur­ing the last ice. This the­o­ry is called the Solutre­an the­o­ry and hap­logroup X dis­tri­b­u­tion and Clo­vis spear points are used as evi­dence. The the­o­ry that groups of peo­ple crossed over 3000 miles of frozen Atlantic Ocean ice is hard to swal­low for the vast major­i­ty of sci­en­tist and this the­o­ry is not accept­ed. Any dat­ing of hap­logroup X by car­bon dat­ing past 6000 BC I believe is incor­rect because of the evi­dence that will be pro­vid­ed and the envi­ron­men­tal, uncer­tain atmos­pher­ic con­di­tions of mil­len­ni­al dates, and vari­able inputs need­ed for car­bon dat­ing and bias­es of researchers.

The point of this is that the­o­ries of the pop­u­lat­ing of the Amer­i­can con­ti­nent is fraught with holes. I believe DNA, cul­tur­al, and lin­guis­tic evi­dence will show that the Amer­i­can con­ti­nent was pop­u­lat­ed through trans-ocean­ic voy­ages by ships ver­sus land migra­tions in artic tem­per­a­tures across bar­ren ice. A view of geo­graph­i­cal loca­tions of South Amer­i­can DNA found in Asia has many loca­tions in South Asia with fair­ly close prox­im­i­ty to the ocean sug­gest­ing ocean these voy­ages. The Book of Mor­mon states that there were three trans-ocean­ic migra­tions by ship, Lehi’s fam­i­ly, the Mulekites and the Jared­ites. Poly­ne­sian DNA the leg­end of Fu sand and the Book of Mor­mon is all evi­dence that the Pop­u­lat­ing of North Amer­i­can was done by ship and not on artic land masses.

The tim­ing of ini­tial entry into the Amer­i­c­as is uncer­tain. Through use of esti­mates of mtD­NA diver­si­ty and rates of mtD­NA evo­lu­tion, a broad range of dates (11,000–43,000 years BP) have been esti­mat­ed (Tor­roni et al. 1994; Bon­at­to and Salzano 1997a; Lorenz and Smith 1997; Stone and Stonek­ing 1998). Although researchers have rec­og­nized the need to incor­po­rate pop­u­la­tion his­to­ry in their esti­mates, the wide range of dates report­ed in the lit­er­a­ture for the peo­pling of the Amer­i­c­as sug­gests that accu­rate mod­els of Native Amer­i­can pop­u­la­tion his­to­ry, accu­rate mod­els of the evo­lu­tion of mtD­NA, and suf­fi­cient sam­pling of pop­u­la­tions in the Amer­i­c­as have not yet emerged.”


As will be shown in the essay North Amer­i­can Indi­ans have beliefs that match the Book of Mor­mon per­fect­ly. To include that Chero­kee and Iro­quois killed off a white race of Indi­an, cer­tain Indi­an tribes sailed to North Amer­i­ca and beliefs of writ­ten char­ac­ters and let­ters. They had a lost gospel tak­en away from them, beliefs of a flood and Christ-like appear­ance. They also have Hebrew like lan­guage and cul­ture and tem­ple prac­tices. Based on their own beliefs and tra­di­tions the Chero­kee and Iro­quois make up the pri­ma­ry tribes to be the Laman­ites. The Mic­mac Indi­ans based on the writ­ings of Father Chret­ian Le Cler­cq are most like­ly to have been direct descen­dants of the Nephites.

Below I have added some quotes about Indi­an beliefs, cul­ture and lan­guage. The quotes and evi­dence pro­vid­ed is a small sam­pling and just begins to scratch the sur­face out of the many books that have been writ­ten about the Amer­i­can Indi­ans. To make the state­ment that there is no DNA, arche­o­log­i­cal, cul­tur­al and lin­guis­tic evi­dence to sup­port the Book of Mor­mon is com­plete­ly false the oppo­site is true. The quotes below come from today’s anthro­pol­o­gist. And the 19th 18th 17th cen­tu­ry books are used by his­to­ri­ans to write the his­to­ry of the North Amer­i­can Indi­ans. Some peo­ple might find using these sources as trou­ble­some. But when it comes to explor­ing the beliefs cul­ture and tra­di­tions of the Amer­i­can Indi­ans the old­er the source the bet­ter due to the sys­tem­at­ic destruc­tion of the Native Amer­i­can way of life in the 18th, 19th and 20th cen­tu­ry. One will also notice that state­ments made will be sup­port­ed by mul­ti­ple sources some from dif­fer­ent coun­tries and time spans.

Haplogroup X Distribution

Hap­logroup X dis­tri­b­u­tion match­es the his­tor­i­cal record giv­en in the Book of Mor­mon and Bible. Accord­ing to the Heart­land Mod­el Lehi and his fam­i­ly land­ed some­where between the Flori­da Pan­han­dle and Mis­sis­sip­pi. Nephi and his fam­i­ly imme­di­ate­ly sep­a­rat­ed from Laman and went into the wilder­ness. The Seed of Nephi would most like­ly be the Cau­casian DNA mark­er of hap­logroup X and Laman’s seed would have mixed with the Asian eth­nic tribes of that area and era. In the Book of Mor­mon it states that the Nephites con­stant­ly had to move North because their tra­di­tion­al lands south were being over tak­en by the Laman­ites. The Nephites also had an exten­sive trade sys­tem that includ­ed the use of hors­es and char­i­ots. We can see from the map that hap­logroup X reached to and beyond the Rocky Moun­tains. That match­es the state­ments that Joseph Smith made about Zelph that he was known from the Rocky Moun­tains to the east­ern see (Lake Ontario). If the Hopewell Indi­ans are the Nephites we know that the exten­sive trade sys­tem of the Hopewell’s reached to the Rocky Moun­tains to Lake Ontario and beyond as shown in the hap­logroup X map. Hagoth sailed across the West Sea with over 5000 men women and chil­dren and he made this voy­age twice. The west sea is most like­ly Lake Michi­gan. Hagoth would have pop­u­lat­ed what is now Cana­da. Hagoth’s seed for the most part could have avoid­ed the Nephite geno­cide which hap­pened in the Great Lakes area and would account for the largest con­cen­tra­tion of hap­logroup X in Cana­da. I know that prophets and apos­tles made state­ments that Hagoth sailed to the Poly­ne­sian Islands. I believe this to be incor­rect. I believe they made these state­ments based on opin­ion and the knowl­edge and accept­ed the­o­ries of that day. Prophets and apos­tles opin­ions have been wrong before about incon­se­quen­tial and con­tro­ver­sial top­ics such as the idea that blacks would nev­er receive the Priest­hood and that men lived on the moon.


As far as the Europe and Mid­dle East dis­tri­b­u­tion goes we know that Man­asseh and his seed were in Egypt, Per­sia, and then went north to what is believed by tra­di­tion­al accounts of the Lost Ten Tribes mov­ing north. Each geo­graph­i­cal loca­tion men­tioned in the Bible and Book of Mor­mon is account­ed for from the orig­i­na­tion point of hap­logroup X and its move north into Europe. One research paper has point­ed out that the Galilee Druze of Israel have the most diver­si­ty and the high­est con­cen­tra­tion of Hap­logroup X found on the Euro­pean and Eurasian continent.

These Galilee Druze indi­vid­u­als rep­re­sent the refugium of an ances­tral group with high diver­si­ty and high fre­quen­cy of hap­logroup X, which was more preva­lent in the region in antiq­ui­ty, and from which the glob­al diver­si­ty of X mtD­NA hap­logroup emerged.

We found that 39 of 41 hap­logroup X Druze indi­vid­u­als were from the Galilee heights (Table S2), cor­re­spond­ing to 21.4% (39÷182) of the sam­ples from that region. Enrich­ment analy­sis revealed that both X1 and X2 were high­ly enriched in this region”

The high­est con­cen­tra­tions in the world of hap­logroup X is found in the Israeli Galilee Druze at 27%. The North Amer­i­can Indi­ans specif­i­cal­ly the Ojib­wa have the sec­ond high­est con­cen­tra­tion of hap­lo group x in the world. Hap­logroup X is found in Europe in sin­gle dig­its. This match to the Bible and Book of Mor­mon is quite remark­able. If hap­logroup X trav­eled with hap­logroup A, B, C and D across Asia to North Amer­i­ca, why do Ojib­wa have the sec­ond high­est con­cen­tra­tion? It’s remark­able that a tribe in North Amer­i­ca has almost the same con­cen­tra­tion of hap­logroup X in Israelis. This rep­re­sents to me a recent and dis­tinct voy­age to the new world prob­a­bly around 600BC. I believe it also shows that the Ojib­wa in par­tic­u­lar did not inter­mar­ry or pop­u­late with the oth­er hap­logroups already in the Amer­i­c­as. Hap­logroup X is dis­tinct from oth­er hap­logroups in every way.

The Book of Mor­mon points out two dis­tinct civ­i­liza­tions that had met­al­lur­gy and woven cloth. The North Amer­i­can con­ti­nent dur­ing the Book of Mor­mon time­line had two cul­tures and only two cul­tures that match this descrip­tion: the Hopewell and Ade­na. The time­line giv­en by the Book of Mor­mon match­es the Hopewell cul­ture and the end of the Ade­na cul­ture. DNA dis­tri­b­u­tion of the Euro­pean and North Amer­i­can con­ti­nent is also a match. There is absolute­ly no way that Joseph Smith could have known about the time­lines and DNA dis­tri­b­u­tion of these two cultures.

Asian Ethnic Tribes

The Asian eth­nic tribes came from the west on the oth­er hand the Great Lake Indi­ans said they sailed here from anoth­er coun­try to Amer­i­ca from the east. “On the con­trary, their tra­di­tions inform us that they came from the west that they crossed the Mis­sis­sip­pi, and that they grad­u­al­ly trav­elled towards the east, “When you ask them,” says Law­son, speak­ing of the Car­oli­na-Indi­ans, ” whence their Fore-fathers came, that first inhab­it­ed the coun­try, they will point to the West­ward and say. Where the Sun sleep, our Fore-fathers came thence As far as my inquiries have extend­ed, all the Indi­an nations on this side of the Mis­sis­sip­pi assert, that they trav­eled from the west, from the north­west, or from the south. Many of them speak of their trav­el across the Mis­sis­sip­pi. The Natchez informed Du Pratz, that before they came into the coun­try east of the Mis­sis­sip­pi, they dwelt near­ly in the south-west, “under the sun” The Musko­hge, or Creeks, assert that they crossed the Mis­sis­sip­pi about the time that the army of Soto ram­bled through Flori­da. || The Chikkasah have told me, that they for­mer­ly lived to the west of the Mis­sis­sip­pi and that they relin­quished that coun­try in obe­di­ence to a dream, in which they were advised to leave their west­ern estab­lish­ment and to go to the coun­try where the sun rises.”
(Bar­ton 1798 pg. XCII)

Fu Sang

How did the Asian eth­nic tribes arrive in North Amer­i­ca? A belief that they crossed the Bering ice bridge 30000 years ago goes against the idea that some believ­ers hold that human life began with Adam and Eve 4000 years ago and against DNA evi­dence. I find the leg­end of Fu Sang an accept­able alter­na­tive vs the Bering land bridge the­o­ry. The leg­end of Fu Sang is that the Chi­nese sailed to Amer­i­ca. The evi­dence used for this are Chi­nese style anchors found off the coast of Cal­i­for­nia, leg­ends describ­ing gigan­tic trees (red­woods found in Cal­i­for­nia) from a new land. Mar­co Polo is also used as evi­dence for Fu Sang. There is a 14th cen­tu­ry goat skin map that shows what looks like the coast of Alas­ka what is believed to be passed down from Mar­co Polo to his posterity.

Series Nav­i­ga­tion: North Amer­i­can Book of Mor­mon Geog­ra­phy — David McK­ane« Tribe of Man­asseh — North Amer­i­can Nephite Mod­elTribe of Man­asseh — Tech­nol­o­gy and Animals »
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 16, 2015 6:07 pm

David, you have obvi­ous­ly done a lot of work on this and I applaud you for it. How­ev­er, it does look a bit like you are being a lit­tle choosy about the data you cite or that at min­i­mum you are going one con­clu­sion beyond your data. That may be unfair of me to say since I don’t have the sci­en­tif­ic foun­da­tion to intel­li­gent­ly val­ue your sources nor the time to inves­ti­gate each of them at length. So far though, the sources I have read don’t appear to draw the same con­clu­sion you do. The Wikipedia arti­cle on Hap­logroup X that you ref­er­ence at the top of this page dis­cuss­es no spe­cial con­nec­tion between the Druze and Native Amer­i­can pop­u­la­tions and instead focus­es on the Altai peo­ple as the “best avail­able can­di­date for the ances­tral source region for the Native Amer­i­can pop­u­la­tion sys­tem”. Fur­ther, while describ­ing the Solutre­an hypoth­e­sis, it… Read more »

Reply to  Dave Mack
January 2, 2016 12:48 am

Thanks for the response! I have read the mate­r­i­al you ref­er­enced. Sad­ly, I’m still hav­ing trou­ble under­stand­ing how it sup­ports your con­clu­sions. I still think you’re mak­ing sev­er­al log­i­cal leaps in the genet­ic argu­ment and I’ll try to explain them below. You’re right that there is a lot of sup­port for mul­ti­ple migra­tion the­o­ries but none of the evi­dence you’ve linked points to a mid­dle-east­ern source for any of them. For instance, the Har­vard study you linked describes three sep­a­rate migra­tions from Asia: the ini­tial “First Amer­i­cans” migra­tion, one to the far north that can be seen in the genet­ics of the Aleut-Inu­it, and one that has a minor­i­ty influ­ence on the genet­ics of the Chipewyan peo­ple of the Hud­son Bay region of Cana­da. This research does not pro­vide any evi­dence for Nephites, rather it says that the vast major­i­ty of native amer­i­can peo­ples came from the sin­gle, Asian, “First Amer­i­cans”… Read more »

Wes T
November 29, 2015 11:33 am

David, this isn’t at all what I under­stood from Heber’s com­ment. He has shown an under­stand­ing for the DNA stud­ies and then you claim he must not know that hap­logroup X is not of Asian ori­gin, unlike A,B,C,D. Why are you respond­ing with these straw­man arguments?

November 27, 2015 8:39 am

How do you respond to the Brazil 2008 arti­cle in the Amer­i­can Jour­nal of Human Genet­ics: “Our results strong­ly sup­port the hypoth­e­sis that hap­logroup X, togeth­er with the oth­er four main mtD­NA hap­logroups, was part of the gene pool of a sin­gle Native Amer­i­can found­ing pop­u­la­tion; there­fore they do not sup­port mod­els that pro­pose hap­logroup-inde­pen­dent migra­tions, such as the migra­tion from Europe posed by the Solutre­an hypoth­e­sis … Here we show, by using 86 com­plete mito­chon­dr­i­al genomes, that all Native Amer­i­can hap­logroups, includ­ing hap­logroup X, were part of a sin­gle found­ing pop­u­la­tion, there­by refut­ing mul­ti­ple-migra­tion models.”

Reply to  Dave Mack
November 27, 2015 10:38 pm

Have you looked at that arti­cle? Because you did­n’t address the ques­tion at all. Why is your non-peer reviewed, invent­ed expla­na­tion bet­ter than the actu­al­ly proven and peer reviewed expla­na­tion from that article?

Reply to  Dave Mack
November 28, 2015 9:26 pm

You men­tioned “This research arti­cle dat­ed to 2014 refers to the three wave migra­tion and sug­gest even more than three” ( http://​www​.sci​encemag​.org/​c​o​n​t​e​n​t​/​3​4​5​/​6​2​0​0​/​1​255832), but that arti­cle has noth­ing to do with Native Amer­i­cans. It is irrel­e­vant to this discussion. The quote you men­tion from the Brazil study ( http://​www​.ncbi​.nlm​.nih​.gov/​p​m​c​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​s​/​P​M​C​2​4​27228/) is from the abstract and it is set­ting the con­text for their study, it is not at all refer­ring to their find­ings. If you were to spend time to read the study rather than just dis­miss it based on the sec­ond sen­tence in the abstract, you may find it inter­est­ing. For exam­ple, “There­fore, our results strong­ly indi­cate that the diver­si­ty pat­tern in Native Amer­i­can mtD­NA results from a demo­graph­ic expan­sion in the found­ing pop­u­la­tion in which all found­ing hap­lo­types were present.” They clear­ly refute every one of your DNA claims, show­ing why hap­logroup X is very lim­it­ed in Siberia and found in… Read more »

Reply to  Dave Mack
November 29, 2015 8:02 am

You are using all these periph­ery, non-rel­e­vant cas­es as evi­dence for a very clear hypothesis. Let me restate your own null hypoth­e­sis: hap­logroup X came across with the oth­er haplogroups. To con­clude that null hypoth­e­sis is false, as you are try­ing to do, you must show evi­dence that hap­logroup X could­n’t have come to Amer­i­c­as with the oth­er hap­logroups A, B, C, and D. The Brazil study explains why X is not found in east Asia, cen­tral and South Amer­i­ca and pro­vides evi­dence that it did in fact diverge at the same time as A, B, C, and D in Amer­i­c­as. That breaks your mod­el so you out­right reject it with­out any evi­dence or rea­son, pure emotion. The stud­ies you keep ref­er­enc­ing have noth­ing to do with hap­logroup X. The Poly­ne­sian and Aus­tralian DNA in South Amer­i­ca have noth­ing to do with hap­logroup X. The Arctic/Eskimo DNA have noth­ing to do… Read more »

Reply to  Dave Mack
November 29, 2015 7:14 pm

I am very per­plexed by your response, David. I under­stand very well that HG X is not a vari­a­tion of HGs A, B, C, or D. And I under­stand very well that HG X2 is found pri­mar­i­ly in the Near East, etc. I feel some­what embar­rassed that my respons­es led you to think so poor­ly of me. Your premise that “you should see a genet­ic trail of hap­lo group x from the Mid­dle East to the North Amer­i­can con­ti­nent via the Bering land Bridge” is just non­sense. Why would that have to be the case? That was exact­ly what the Brazil­ian study you seem to irra­tional­ly despise clear­ly refut­ed. Your evi­dence to the con­trary are all from 2001 or pri­or. Sure, there were oth­er migra­tions and some of them may not have been through the cor­ri­dor, but those don’t mat­ter for the HGs in ques­tion: A‑D and X. I haven’t seen any… Read more »

November 17, 2015 6:30 pm


Sev­er­al of your claims are demon­stra­bly false.

You claim that the X lin­eage has not been found in Asia. This is false. It was found in cen­tral Siberia about 15 years ago! This pub­li­ca­tion from 2003 demon­strates that fact.

Mid­dle East­ern X lin­eages are very dis­tant­ly relat­ed to Native Amer­i­can X lin­eages. See paper above.

You claim the X lin­eage is absent in Pale­oin­di­ans. The X lin­eage has been found in a 9,000-year-old Pale­oin­di­an skele­ton. This means it almost cer­tain­ly arrived in the Amer­i­c­as along­side the A, B, C and D lineages.

The Solutre­an hypoth­e­sis is reject­ed by most seri­ous anthro­pol­o­gists because the evi­dence just does­n’t sup­port it.

November 4, 2015 6:59 am

Ok, so I haven’t had enough to time to real­ly inves­ti­gate all of his claims in the paper, but I focused main­ly on the DNA aspect since it is the hinge of his entire the­sis. It seems he has over­looked some of the more recent research regard­ing the Hap­lo­type Group X data that he uses to demon­strate a link between NE Amerindi­an tribes and Europe, how­ev­er, most of the recent research with­in the past 5 years has con­firmed that this X2a group also came across the Bering straight about 20,000 years ago. In fact, a Mon­go­lian girl was found last year with this same hap­lo­type around the time that these migra­tions would be occur­ing. There is even geo­log­i­cal evi­dence sug­gest­ing a nice route to cut across south­ern Cana­da to end up in the east­ern U.S. I can cite many of the arti­cles here, but there is an arti­cle that sum­ma­rizes a now… Read more »

Demetrios Alexander
Demetrios Alexander
Reply to  Dave Mack
June 4, 2019 5:15 pm

Can you share your email address? I would like to share some­thing with you.

October 29, 2015 10:16 pm

This is non­sense. The 12000–30000 years num­ber isn’t some­thing sci­en­tists just pulled out of their ass. You can tell how long ago pop­u­la­tions inter­sect­ed by how much the DNA has changed: https://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​M​o​l​e​c​u​l​a​r​_clock

For hap­logroup X and Native Amer­i­cans specif­i­cal­ly, check out any of the top ten or so of these: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=haplogroup+X+bering+strait&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C44&as_sdtp=