In his booklet The Seed of the Serpent, James E. Wise wrote in part:
“In the California Jewish Voice, a publication, dated August 17, 1956, there is an article which we think should be at least mentioned in part. It says: ‘The Jews in all parts of the world are members of a Mediterranean racial group having distinct genetic factors not found among non-Jews, two Israeli scientist reported here this weekend at the first International Congress on human genetics.’
“The Israeli scientist, Dr. Leo Sachs of the Weizmann Institute, and Dr. Bat-Miram of the Israel[i] Institute for Biological Research, used fingerprint patterns in their investigations. After examining 4,000 prints of immigrants to Israel[i] from Poland, Germany, Iraq, Egypt, Morocco, Yemen, Bulgaria, and Turkey, the scientist found a unique pattern of loops, whorls, and arches which could not be found in samples of fingerprints of non-Jews which they studied.”
Inasmuch as James E. Wise’s booklet had no copyright, and was no longer being circulated, I decided to reformat it with a few critical notes added. Later his son contacted me by phone and informed me his father had died, and seemed happy that I was continuing his father’s endeavor. Up until that time about fifteen years ago, it was the only documentation I had on Edomite-jewish fingerprints. With this paper, I will give further proof that James E. Wise was right on the money on this subject of the above cited Israeli (Israel lie) fingerprints. For this evidence I will be quoting from a 426 page book (plus index) entitled Race and Modern Science; A Collection of Essays by Biologists, Anthropologists, Sociologists and Psychologists, © 1967, (hereinafter RAMS), promoted by UNESCO, a specialized agency of the United (jew-nited) Nations which is an offshoot of the League of Nations. Caution: This is a source to be especially careful with, but with the following damning evidence the Edomite-jew shoots himself in the foot!
Now quoting from RAMS, pp. 156-157, under the subtitle “The Influence of Cultural Barriers” by David C. Rife in part:
“... Today the new nation of Israel [sic Israeli] is made up of Jews, many of whom have migrated from North Africa, Yemen, Spain, Germany, Russia and even more remote areas. This reunion is occurring after centuries of separation.
“Careful studies of the genetic make-up of modern Israelites [sic Israelis] shed interesting light on how religious differences may be correlated with genetic differences. Jewish immigrants from different regions manifest some significant differences in the ABO blood group frequencies (Mourant, 1954). Dermatoglyphics present a somewhat different picture. The fingerprints of Jewish immigrants from all over the world are remarkably similar. Fingerprint configurations are highly heritable. They are determined months before birth, and are non-affected by post-natal environment. These findings strongly suggest that Jews have not intermarried with Gentiles [sic White Caucasians] nearly as much as has been generally supposed. It must be added that the fingerprints of Jews differ significantly from those of non-Jews in the host countries (Sachs and Bat-Miriam, 1957). American Jews are characterized by highly significant differences from Protestants and Catholics in fingerprints and ABO blood groups. In general, American Jews closely resemble Syrians and Lebanese in serological, dermatoglyphic, and anthropometric characters.
“Fingerprint configurations are perhaps the most outstanding example of polygenic non-pathological hereditary variations in man. As such they may be less subject to the effects of genetic drift than such simply inherited variations as the blood groups. Where two or more pairs of genes operate on a single trait, fluctuation in the frequency of one pair may be counterbalanced by opposite fluctuations in other pairs.
“It is impossible to accurately assess the relative roles of selection and genetic drift in bringing about inter-population differences. Traits which may appear to be of no selective importance whatsoever can be conditioned by genes which also affect other traits of survival importance. Until recent years it was generally believed that the ABO blood groups were of no importance from the standpoint of survival ....”
RAMS under the subtitle “Genetic Factors in Population Relationship”, pp. 150-151 by David C. Rife in part:
“... With the exception of the major races, genetic differences between populations fall almost entirely in the categories of non-fixed and partially fixed genes. All known blood group differences belong in these categories. Although Peruvian Indians are all of group O, there is no population in which Group O is completely lacking. No population is homozygous for cell sickling. Two Stone Age races, the South African Bushmen and Australian aborigines show the most extreme variations between populations in the incidence of patterns on fingertips. South African Bushmen have less than 20 percent whorls, while Australian aborigines have 70 percent (Cummins and Stetzler, 1951). Conversely, South African Bushmen have more arches than whorls, whereas Australian aborigines have less than 1 percent. Yet neither type of pattern is fixed in either population. It is of interest to note that the most extreme differences in this respect occur in two of the oldest contemporary populations, separated from each other longer, perhaps, than any others ....”
RAMS, pp. 87-88, under the subtitle “Physical Anthropology of the Bantu”, by J.D.J. Hofmeyr in part:
“... It should be considered that the Bantu include different ethnic groups and are therefore more heterogeneous than either the Bush, Hottentots, or Koranas. A comparative study of Bantu sub-groups was conducted by Elsdon-Dew (1934) ...
“Elsdon-Dew (1934) comments as follows on the above study: ‘The Bantu of Southern Africa are not homogeneous, and show a distribution in four main groups, the first – which we will call the ancient, consisting of Chopi, Inyambane, Swazi, and Northern Sotho. The second or intermediate group is composed of Tswana, Southern Sotho, Zulu, Shangaan, and Nyasaland Angoni. The third group consisting of Mpondo and Xhosa ... Finally the Achewa have a position separate from the remainder.’
“It has been known for many years that finger and palm patterns (dermatoglyphics) show significant variations from race to race. In a recent study by Tobias (1961), he made use of the Cummins Pattern Index as an aid to express, by a single value, the intensity or complexity of the pattern formation in the groups investigated. He writes as follows: ‘This study provides the first evidence of differences in gene frequency between Northern and Central-Southern Bushmen and between Northern Bushmen and Eastern Pygmies ....’ Central and Southern Bushmen apparently show a pattern approaching that of the Bantu more closely than that of the Northern Bushmen ....”
Francis Galton F.R.S:
Galton displayed his own fingerprints as part of his title page. His Introduction begins by calling his readers’ attention to ‘the so-called papillary ridges.’ Wilson’s introduction of fingerprints at the trial is MT’s version of the following paragraph, the second in Galton’s book:]
“Let no one despise the ridges on account of their smallness, for they are in some respects the most important of all anthropological data. We shall see that they form patterns, considerable in size and of a curious variety of shape, whose boundaries can be firmly outlined, and which are little worlds in themselves. They have the unique merit of retaining their peculiarities unchanged throughout life, and afford in consequence an incomparably surer criterion of identity than any other bodily feature. They may be made to throw welcome light on some of the most interesting biological questions of the day, such as heredity, symmetry, correlation, and the nature of genera and species. A representation of their lineations is easily secured in a self-recorded form, by inking the fingers in the way that will be explained, and pressing them on paper. There is no prejudice to be overcome in procuring these most trustworthy signmanuals, no vanity to be pacified, no untruths to be guarded against. (pp. 1-2) ....
“In the twelfth chapter we come to a branch of the subject of which I had great expectations, that have been falsified, namely, their use in indicating Race and Temperament. I thought that any hereditary peculiarities would almost of necessity vary in different races, and that so fundamental and enduring a feature as the finger markings must in some way be correlated with temperament.
“The races I have chiefly examined are English, most of whom are of the upper and middle classes; the others chiefly from London board schools; Welsh, from the purest Welsh-speaking districts of South Wales; Jews from the large London schools, and Negroes from the territories of the Royal Niger Company. I have also a collection of Basque prints taken at Cambo, some twenty miles inland from Biarritz, which, although small, is large enough to warrant a provisional conclusion. As a first and only an approximately correct description, the English, Welsh, Jews, Negroes, and Basques, may all be spoken of as identical in the character of their finger prints; the same familiar patterns appearing in all of them with much the same degrees of frequency, the differences between groups of different races being not larger than those that occasionally occur between groups of the same race. The Jews have, however, a decidedly larger proportion of Whorled patterns than other races, and I should have been tempted to make an assertion about a peculiarity in the Negroes, had not one of their groups differed greatly from the rest. The task of examination has been laborious thus far, but it would be much more so to arrive with correctness at a second and closer approximation to the truth. It is doubtful at present whether it is worthwhile to pursue the subject, except in the case of the Hill tribes of India and a few other peculiarly diverse races, for the chance of discovering some characteristic and perhaps a more monkey-like pattern. (pp. 17-18) ....”
Below is an Edomite-jewish fingerprint from the Internet:
Fingerprints Can Reveal Race and Sex by Nic Fleming, Science Correspondent 7:31AM BST 03 Aug 2007 at:
“A new fingerprinting technique that can identify the race and sex, and possibly the diet of suspects has been developed.
“Scientists have shown that using a gelatine-based gel and high-tech chemical analysis can provide significant clues to a person’s identity even if police do not hold existing fingerprint records.
“The new method can pick up tiny traces of substances such as gunpowder, drugs, or biological or chemical weapons. Preliminary tests, highlighted in this month’s edition of the journal Analytical Chemistry,also suggest it could be used to provide crucial court evidence by pinpointing the precise time – accurate to the nearest hour – that prints were left at crime scenes.
“Prof Sergei Kazarian, from Imperial College London’s Department of Chemical Engineering, who led the team that developed the technique, said: ‘Our trials show that this technique could play a significant role in the fight against crime.
“‘The combined operational advantages and benefits for forensic scientists of tape lifting prints and spectroscopic imaging really maximises the amount of information one can obtain from fingerprints.
“‘By focussing [sic] on what is left in a fingerprint after periods of time, scientists could potentially gauge how old a crime scene is.
“‘Studying what happens to prints, when they are exposed to high temperatures, could also be particularly significant, especially in arson cases where lifting prints has been notoriously hard.’
“Chemical residues containing a few millionths of a gram of fluid can be found on all fingerprints, however they are often distorted or destroyed by conventional techniques.
“Prof Kazarian found that using commercial gelatine based tape, already used by police to collect footprint [sic], can provide a simple method for collection and transportation of prints.
“He analysed prints left by volunteers under spectroscopic microscope – providing a detailed picture of its [sic] chemical make-up: (1) Particular chemical compositions were found to provide specific clues to the identity of the volunteer who left the fingerprint. (2) Strong traces of urea, a chemical found in urine, suggested a man left the print. (3) Lower levels of the chemical made it more likely to be from a women. (4) Specific amino acids indicated whether the ‘suspect’ was a vegetarian or meat-eater, and (5) different fatty acid profiles suggested provided clues to their racial origins.
“Prof Kazarian added: ‘In the courtroom of the near future, chemical images could feature as key evidence.
“‘I hope our work assists law enforcement authorities to bring dangerous criminals to justice.’
“Forensics experts both from the Home Office and the US government are known to be studying the results of the initial tests with interest.”
I should point out that I am not in total agreement with RAMS, and other biased sources on “Eugenics and Race”, and I will cite William Bradford Shockley’s book on this subject written by Roger Pearson, document 16, “Anthropological Taboos About Determinations of Racial Mixes”, pp. 223-224:
“Most anthropologists are intellectually irresponsible about the problems of race and intelligence. A world-wide tragedy may grow because national leaders will be misled by trusting erroneous anthropological views. Of all the scientific disciplines, anthropology is most responsible for science about the biological basis for humanity’s social structures – including the effects of racial differences. But many anthropologists assert that the concept of race is a ‘myth’ and urge taboos against related research.
“A significant exception is Dr. T.E. Reed, professor in the departments of anthropology and zoology at the University of Toronto. In 1969 he used racial differences to find that 22% of the heredity (genes) of some 3000 Oakland, California Negroes came from white ancestors by analyzing Diffy blood-type statistics with a probable error of 1%. He also made a discordant but a less accurate estimate of 27% from a smaller sample using a different blood type. The discordance between 22% and 27% resulted from limitations in the theoretical methods then available. I [Shockley] published the theory in 1973 and eliminated the discordance by showing that the best value was 23% for both blood types.
“Do those anthropologists who consider the concept of race to be a myth reject these research results for scientific reasons? For an answer, I persuaded an outstanding investigative reporter to select and interview a sample of anthropologists, excerpts from the interview report reveal, not science, but taboos:
“‘Nine anthropologists were chosen at random from those in major colleges and institutions. All had tenure or equivalent status.
“‘Four of the nine simply had no knowledge of the procedure used to make the determination of racial admixtures. One said that such studies ‘are not of interest to any anthropologists that I know of nor would they be to any enlightened scientist.’
“‘Another four had some knowledge that racial admixtures might be determined, but considered this unimportant or too controversial, (one mentioned T.E. Reed’s paper Caucasian Genes in American Negroes, Science, 22 August 1969.) But all four discounted the procedure as irrelevant, out-of-date, and/or offensive.
“‘The remaining anthropologist was a professor from the South who insisted that the procedure could not be done at all. He observed that determining racial admixtures was ‘dark ages genetics that only non-scientists like newspaper reporters are interested in.’
“‘From these nine interviews, I conclude that the determination of racial admixtures is an unpopular subject and suffers from ignorance, a lack of interest, and, at least, a modicum of fear’.”
“Scientists have served humanity well by conquering disease and multiplying food supplies. But the application of science to tragic social problems will be frustrated if blocked by taboos like those indicated by the nine interviews discussed above.
“Determination of racial admixtures is a subject few anthropologists know anything about or feel they should know about. This conclusion was arrived at as a result of interviews with nine U.S. anthropologists over a period of one week.
“These anthropologists were chosen at random from those with tenure or equivalent academic status and were located in major colleges and institutions in six different States plus the District of Columbia. My conclusions then are these:
“‘1. The procedure discussed in Reed’s paper for determining racial admixtures is not widely known among anthropologists, those who do know about it are familiar with it on second-hand terms only. In no case was I able to interview anyone who was engaged in this kind of research presently or had ever been engaged in it. Furthermore I asked six of the respondents if they knew of anyone doing research in this area. One of them did. But when I tracked this researcher down, I discovered that he was a geneticist. (Incidentally, this geneticist said that the method for determining racial admixture was unreliable at best and was not an area of interest to him. His specialty was the study of twin phenotypes.)
“‘2. There is widespread feeling that this area of knowledge is not necessarily the province of anthropologists. Almost everyone seemed to feel unqualified to speak at length on this subject except the Southern gentleman who rejected out-of-hand the idea of determining racial admixtures but was immodest enough to claim that he knew enough to know that it couldn’t be done.
“‘3. Four out of nine indicated in several different ways that this subject, even if it were in the province of anthropology, is not popular nor of interest to them. I interpreted these remarks to indicate a lack of personal interest as well as a self-protective reticence to dig into the subject.
“‘It was my hypothesis from the beginning that this subject is not the kind likely to generate research grants from private foundations or the federal government. In short, the determination of racial admixture is an unpopular subject and suffers from ignorance, a lack of interest, and at least a modicum of fear’.” [End of Shockley]
Truly, RAMS is very biased on the word race, trying to include all races under the Latin terms “Homo-sapiens”, meaning those who include only “prudent, wise, judicial & philosophic” people! (Junior Classic Latin Dictionary; Latin-English & English-Latin, by Antonio J. Provost, University of Notre Dame, pp. 52 & 113). Only White Caucasian people have these traits!