Author Topic: Not allowed to be Tsar?  (Read 26579 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #60 on: September 13, 2007, 01:38:24 PM »
You would also know Czar Nicholas 11, had a rare mutation that matched his brother but not Prince Phillip

Why would you expect Nicholas's mtDNA match Prince Philip's? They weren't related.

The answer is if the head of the Romanov family would care to see the proof of facts by photos of same inhereited markings, I will  provide them to him, as well the Russain Scientist who is conducting the DNA tests on recent remains found.

I would also provide photo or photos of myself to show the same inheritence and my DNA to be examined to see if it matched the mutation Nicholas 11 had.  In closing I can further advise one of my children inhereited the same gentic markings from me, which verifies the inherited markings are DNA blood line produced and are part of a complex inheritence that decends in ancestral family lines. 
 

And the point of all this would be....?

Offline Valmont

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 379
  • I love History  !!
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #61 on: September 13, 2007, 02:56:10 PM »
Noble,
What are you trying to say/ probe / explain?
From what I have read, I can infer you are a myterious Romanov heir to the throne of the Russian Empire, And you have the receipts to probe it.
Is that it????
Arturo Vega-Llausás

Offline Alexander_IV

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 101
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #62 on: September 13, 2007, 04:48:59 PM »
DNA testing goes through the female line so whatever links there are for Alexis would be through Alexandra Feodorovna.

That's not true. Only tests done on mtDNA only 'go through the female line'.
That's because mitochondria of every zygote are all coming from the egg and thus only have maternal DNA (at least normally, there have been reports of paternal inheritance of mitochondria as well in mammals and even humans). while the nuclear DNA is from both maternal and paternal origin.


« Last Edit: September 13, 2007, 04:51:52 PM by Alexander_IV »

Offline Ex-Princess Lisa

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #63 on: September 13, 2007, 05:00:02 PM »
Also the Y chromosome will only be inherited on the male line. Females do not not have a Y chromosome. Fathers pass on their Y chromosome to their sons.

The problem with nuclear DNA and this includes the Y chromosome is that it breaks down quickly after death.
Whereas mtDNA does not break down quickly after death, it stays intact for a long time, 100s of years, even thousands of years, e.g. mtDNA testing of the Ice man.

Offline pandora

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 71
  • Whatever you are, be a good one. Abraham Lincoln
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #64 on: September 13, 2007, 05:41:54 PM »
My one & only question to William is: Why hasn't Sandra R. gone public with all of her information? And I'm not talking the 5pm news but the proper authorities? I haven't seen one iota of her claims in any reputable publication or televised on a reputable televised program.

If I were the keeper of all of this information, I'd be yelling from the roof tops the information I have, how I received it and why I want the public to be aware of it. This wouldn't be for money or pubilicity, but to set all records straight and most importantly, make sure history has an accurate record.

None of this makes any sense to me.

Offline Natasya

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • I like Russia, history, and Russian history.
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #65 on: September 13, 2007, 07:54:58 PM »
Yeah, I'm kind of confused about the point trying to be proven...
A proof is a proof and when you have a good proof it's because it's prooven.
-Jean Chretien

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #66 on: September 13, 2007, 08:35:38 PM »
If I were the keeper of all of this information, I'd be yelling from the roof tops the information I have, how I received it and why I want the public to be aware of it. This wouldn't be for money or pubilicity, but to set all records straight and most importantly, make sure history has an accurate record.

None of this makes any sense to me.

Pandora,

Your last statement is the correct observation. It makes no sense because it lacks credibility.

The Estonian, Mr HeinoTammet should have been advised to seek counselling to help dispel his pretentious behavior.

His false claim was not only absurd but it was morally repugnant.

Margarita 


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline J_Kendrick

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #67 on: September 13, 2007, 09:18:39 PM »

I have suggested to her that she look at the hereiditary genetic markings a few Royal Romanov's who's genetic make up produced through their bloodline, identical visible markings that both Czar Nicholas 11 and his son Alexi inherited.  To date she has not responded to show her husband inherited the same. If she does then it proves her claim if not you know the answer.

The heriditary markings have also been inherited in related royals including a few of the Uk Royals. I will disclose what I speak of directly to the head of the Romanov family or the scientist who is conductiing DNA on the two recently found reamains of a boy and girl in Yekaterinburg. if they are not intersted then I will not speak further of DNA evidence on Nicholas 11 or Alexi.

My evidence of facts will be presented to those spoken of, and if they decline my offer, then the true facts of genetic royal blood line that produces the visible markings will not be known, and the true idenity of Alexi's  DNA may never be known.

William


William,

What on earth are you trying to say?  What "evidence" are you refering to?

Margarita


Margarita:

Just so that you know....

When the poster now identifying himself "William" -- not his real name -- speaks about "hereditary genetic markings" that can be seen in a number of related Royals, he is referring to a theory he has developed completely on his own that claims the male descendants of European royalty can be identified by a clearly visible crease in their earlobes.  You should also know that "William" himself has this same "hereditary genetic marking" to which he has referred in his posts.

JK
« Last Edit: September 13, 2007, 09:37:06 PM by J_Kendrick »

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #68 on: September 13, 2007, 09:38:08 PM »

I have suggested to her that she look at the hereiditary genetic markings a few Royal Romanov's who's genetic make up produced through their bloodline, identical visible markings that both Czar Nicholas 11 and his son Alexi inherited.  To date she has not responded to show her husband inherited the same. If she does then it proves her claim if not you know the answer.

The heriditary markings have also been inherited in related royals including a few of the Uk Royals. I will disclose what I speak of directly to the head of the Romanov family or the scientist who is conductiing DNA on the two recently found reamains of a boy and girl in Yekaterinburg. if they are not intersted then I will not speak further of DNA evidence on Nicholas 11 or Alexi.

My evidence of facts will be presented to those spoken of, and if they decline my offer, then the true facts of genetic royal blood line that produces the visible markings will not be known, and the true idenity of Alexi's  DNA may never be known.

William


William,

What on earth are you trying to say?  What "evidence" are you refering to?

Margarita


Margarita:

Just so that you know....

When the poster now identifying himself "William" -- not his real name -- speaks about "hereditary genetic markings" that can seen in a number of related Royals, he is referring to a theory he has developed completely on his own that claims the male descendants of European royalty can be identified by a clearly visible crease in their earlobes.  You should also know that "William" himself has this same "hereditary genetic marking" to which he has referred in his posts.

JK

Why John I was wondering when you would meet again!

Are you nurturing a new project?

Margarita


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline J_Kendrick

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #69 on: September 13, 2007, 09:45:07 PM »
William,

What on earth are you trying to say?  What "evidence" are you refering to?

Margarita


Margarita:

Just so that you know....

When the poster now identifying himself "William" -- not his real name -- speaks about "hereditary genetic markings" that can seen in a number of related Royals, he is referring to a theory he has developed completely on his own that claims the male descendants of European royalty can be identified by a clearly visible crease in their earlobes.  You should also know that "William" himself has this same "hereditary genetic marking" to which he has referred in his posts.

JK

Why John I was wondering when you would meet again!

Are you nurturing a new project?

Margarita


No.  There's no reason to change direction yet.

Let's wait for the test results first.

JK

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #70 on: September 13, 2007, 10:03:35 PM »
No.  There's no reason to change direction yet.

JK

John,

Why bother about a second delusional case?

Margarita
« Last Edit: September 13, 2007, 10:05:31 PM by Belochka »


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline Nicolay

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #71 on: September 13, 2007, 11:03:54 PM »
:)
Oh Dear (god bless your cotton socks) as the English would say.
:)
Then I should belong to this club, too.
(I call it the "Spock" ear)
now my daughter has it too!
My family comes from the same region!

Just to add a little humor to it.
Let me guess it is the left ear and it is only visible on one ear.

:)

Offline Nicolay

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #72 on: September 14, 2007, 10:52:43 AM »
Lets just assume,
and I hate to "ass u me" --- :)
that William is right.

Just alone the fact that my family has it
and looking at the history.
should prove that there must me thousands of us running around out there!

William you need more than just a bent ear!

:)

Offline Nicolay

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #73 on: September 14, 2007, 10:55:30 PM »
For all of you who might think that DNA testing is the A and O of it all,
I have to disappoint you.

For example if a Great Grand Aunt and I are the only survivors of a blood line.
DNA Testing as of today is not able to establish family ties between us!

So much for DNA Testing.

Best wishes,
N


Noble_descendents

  • Guest
Re: Not allowed to be Tsar?
« Reply #74 on: September 15, 2007, 01:26:59 AM »
JK

You mention the poster now identifiying himself as William_not his real name, I'm asuming you were at my baptism to state my real name is not William, I dont wish to mix you up but I can advise I was given two christian names at birth, one was William, the other was Frederic.  If you want to say otherwise please do.

To correct you on another matter or so, I will reply to your comments as noted below.

1.You speak of a theroy I made up on my own that a number of royals have inherited certain gentic markings and I too have the same.

2. Yes I do have the hereiditary gentic markings as does certain royals past and present.

3. Those of royal linage who inhereited said mentioned markings are royal, I am not or have I ever claimed to be royal.

4. What I have claimed based on three respected geneticist theroy which you or I cannott question is,

A. The gene that becomes visible on the royals are considered as a complex inheritence. (passed down in blood line)

B. That the genetic ancestor that produces same visible markers are from what is called a small band ancestor which has limited amount of decendents inheriting the same in this genes decent.

C. That this gene can only materlize when identical genetic make up finds the proper gene sequence from the ancestor.

4. You have further stated in my theroy, I say European royal male  decendents can be identified by a clearly viisible crease on earlobes.

5. What do these theorized crease markings look like as you seem to know more about it than I do.

6 What I have said in the past was certain royals who are related by the same genetic ancestor may show identical markings.

7. I had also mentioned before either the male royal descendent or the female royal descendent can inhereit the same visible ancestral gentic markings. The femail has the same opportunity as the mail in genetic inheritence and stand equel in genetics or otherwise as it should be.

8. As to my inheritance of the same markings and one of my children from me, might be an indication that my theroy is fact as such can you advise what is theroy and what is fact as I am working with fact.

In closing I should mention the theroy you speak of was also inherited by two of my german ancestors, one been a respected business person and the other was a ranking officer in the first world war, both showed the same inhereited markings as did the last Kaiser of Germany.


I do hope one day soon I will have the chance to read your book be factual or theroy.


With respect

William

noble_descendents.bloodline@yahoo.ca