Lard
03-08-2025, 03:05 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCBL9Imol2w
Joshua Robbin Marks, the creator of the Seed of Israel YouTube channel, is yet another Zionist propagandist who distorts Ashkenazi Jewish genetics for political purposes. His content pushes a brownwashed version of Ashkenazi ancestry, exaggerating Levantine origins while ignoring or downplaying the substantial Southern European foundation of the Ashkenazi gene pool.
Marks isn’t just spreading pseudoscience on YouTube—he’s also shilling self-published books on Amazon, where he rehashes the same debunked narratives to cash in on uninformed readers. On top of that, he regularly writes for The Times of Israel, where he repeats the same Levantine-heavy distortion of Ashkenazi genetics, ignoring modern genetic evidence.
Here’s his latest article where he falsely claims that Ashkenazi Jews are a Middle Eastern population:
🔗 https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/ashkenazi-jews-are-middle-eastern/
Marks presents himself as a genetic truth-seeker, yet his own DNA results completely contradict his claims. His attempt to frame Ashkenazim as a balanced European-Middle Eastern hybrid aligns with the same flawed methodologies and cherry-picking found in mainstream genetic studies—the same issues I addressed in my open letter to Dr. Harry Ostrer, which you can read here:
🔗 https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?393267-The-Selective-Science-of-Ashkenazi-Jewish-Genetics-%96-Open-Letter-to-Ostrer
Like Ostrer and other researchers, Marks pushes a narrative designed to maximize Middle Eastern ties while minimizing European ancestry, yet his own DNA proves otherwise. If Marks is truly interested in the genetics of Ashkenazim, why does he ignore his own data?
________________________________________
1. Joshua Robbin Marks’ Own DNA Results Disprove His Claims
Marks argues that Ashkenazim are a balanced mix of European and Middle Eastern ancestry, closely tied to Sephardic Jews and ancient Israelites. However, his own DNA distances completely undermine this claim.
His Closest Genetic Matches:
• Ashkenazi Jew (West) – 0.000 (his primary assigned population)
• Sephardi Jew (Bulgaria) – 0.865
• Sephardi Jew (Turkey) – 1.197
• Italian Jew – 1.203
• General Ashkenazi Jew – 1.655
• Italian (Calabria) – 1.681
• Maltese – 1.690
• Eastern Ashkenazi Jew – 1.707
Key Takeaways:
• His closest match is Western Ashkenazim (0.000)—which simply reflects genetic drift rather than origins.
• His distance to Italian Jews (1.203) is smaller than to general Ashkenazim (1.655) and significantly smaller than to Eastern Ashkenazim (1.707).
• His distance to Italians (Calabria 1.681, Maltese 1.690) is smaller than his distance to Eastern Ashkenazim (1.707).
• No modern Levantine populations (Lebanese, Druze, Palestinians) appear in his closest matches.
If Ashkenazim were truly an equal Middle Eastern-European mix, we would expect:
❌ A stronger genetic proximity to modern Levantines.
❌ A closer match to Eastern Ashkenazim, rather than Italian Jews and Southern Europeans.
❌ A much weaker affinity to Italian populations.
Instead, his own data confirms a dominant Southern European component in Ashkenazi ancestry.
________________________________________
2. His Sephardi Admixture Inflates His Middle Eastern Component
Marks is not fully Ashkenazi—his closest matches include Sephardi Jews, which means his Middle Eastern signal is already higher than it would be for a fully Ashkenazi individual.
• Sephardi Jews have more Middle Eastern ancestry than Ashkenazim due to their history in Iberia, North Africa, and the Ottoman Empire.
• They absorbed more Levantine and North African genetic influences, while Ashkenazim absorbed more Southern European (Greco-Roman) ancestry.
How His DNA Confirms Sephardi Admixture:
• His closest non-identical matches are Sephardi Jews (Bulgaria 0.865, Turkey 1.197) rather than general Ashkenazi Jews (1.655).
• His distance to Italian Jews (1.203) is smaller than to Eastern Ashkenazim (1.707).
• His 11.6% Natufian (Levantine) ancestry is already inflated by his Sephardi side.
A fully Ashkenazi individual would likely have:
✅ Even less Natufian (Levantine) ancestry.
✅ An even stronger affinity to Southern Europe.
Thus, his argument is misleading because he is using his own Sephardi-influenced DNA to generalize about all Ashkenazim.
________________________________________
3. His Late Antiquity Roman Match Is Closer Than Medieval European Jews
In another modeling from Illustrative DNA, Marks is closer to Late Antiquity Central Italians (Rome) than to Medieval European Jews (Erfurt & Norwich):
• Late Antiquity Central Italian (Rome) – 1.919
• Medieval European Jew (Norwich) – 1.925
• Medieval European Jew (Erfurt) – 1.926
Why This Is Important:
✅ His closest ancient population is Late Antiquity Romans, showing strong Southern European influence.
✅ He is further from Medieval Ashkenazim than from Late Antiquity Romans, proving that the Ashkenazi gene pool had already diverged from its Middle Eastern roots before the Middle Ages.
This further supports the Italian bottleneck hypothesis, showing that Ashkenazim absorbed substantial Southern European ancestry before becoming an isolated community in Central and Eastern Europe.
________________________________________
4. Challenge to Marks – Debate Me on The Apricity Instead of Hiding
Marks has no problem pushing his biased narrative on YouTube, but when confronted with the facts, he resorts to blocking users instead of engaging in real debate.
He also benefits from Reddit’s Zionist-controlled moderators, who delete any account that challenges the standard Levantine-heavy narrative on Ashkenazi genetics.
So here’s my challenge:
👉 If Marks actually believes his claims, he should come to The Apricity and debate me openly.
He can’t hide behind YouTube bans or Reddit's politically motivated censorship here. If his argument is so strong, he should have no problem defending it in an open forum where he can’t simply silence opposition.
________________________________________
5. Conclusion – Marks' Own DNA Exposes His Bias
If Marks truly believes in open discussion, then let’s see him actually defend his claims here on The Apricity. Otherwise, it’s clear that his entire narrative is nothing more than politically driven pseudoscience designed to push Zionist propaganda.
Joshua Robbin Marks, the creator of the Seed of Israel YouTube channel, is yet another Zionist propagandist who distorts Ashkenazi Jewish genetics for political purposes. His content pushes a brownwashed version of Ashkenazi ancestry, exaggerating Levantine origins while ignoring or downplaying the substantial Southern European foundation of the Ashkenazi gene pool.
Marks isn’t just spreading pseudoscience on YouTube—he’s also shilling self-published books on Amazon, where he rehashes the same debunked narratives to cash in on uninformed readers. On top of that, he regularly writes for The Times of Israel, where he repeats the same Levantine-heavy distortion of Ashkenazi genetics, ignoring modern genetic evidence.
Here’s his latest article where he falsely claims that Ashkenazi Jews are a Middle Eastern population:
🔗 https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/ashkenazi-jews-are-middle-eastern/
Marks presents himself as a genetic truth-seeker, yet his own DNA results completely contradict his claims. His attempt to frame Ashkenazim as a balanced European-Middle Eastern hybrid aligns with the same flawed methodologies and cherry-picking found in mainstream genetic studies—the same issues I addressed in my open letter to Dr. Harry Ostrer, which you can read here:
🔗 https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?393267-The-Selective-Science-of-Ashkenazi-Jewish-Genetics-%96-Open-Letter-to-Ostrer
Like Ostrer and other researchers, Marks pushes a narrative designed to maximize Middle Eastern ties while minimizing European ancestry, yet his own DNA proves otherwise. If Marks is truly interested in the genetics of Ashkenazim, why does he ignore his own data?
________________________________________
1. Joshua Robbin Marks’ Own DNA Results Disprove His Claims
Marks argues that Ashkenazim are a balanced mix of European and Middle Eastern ancestry, closely tied to Sephardic Jews and ancient Israelites. However, his own DNA distances completely undermine this claim.
His Closest Genetic Matches:
• Ashkenazi Jew (West) – 0.000 (his primary assigned population)
• Sephardi Jew (Bulgaria) – 0.865
• Sephardi Jew (Turkey) – 1.197
• Italian Jew – 1.203
• General Ashkenazi Jew – 1.655
• Italian (Calabria) – 1.681
• Maltese – 1.690
• Eastern Ashkenazi Jew – 1.707
Key Takeaways:
• His closest match is Western Ashkenazim (0.000)—which simply reflects genetic drift rather than origins.
• His distance to Italian Jews (1.203) is smaller than to general Ashkenazim (1.655) and significantly smaller than to Eastern Ashkenazim (1.707).
• His distance to Italians (Calabria 1.681, Maltese 1.690) is smaller than his distance to Eastern Ashkenazim (1.707).
• No modern Levantine populations (Lebanese, Druze, Palestinians) appear in his closest matches.
If Ashkenazim were truly an equal Middle Eastern-European mix, we would expect:
❌ A stronger genetic proximity to modern Levantines.
❌ A closer match to Eastern Ashkenazim, rather than Italian Jews and Southern Europeans.
❌ A much weaker affinity to Italian populations.
Instead, his own data confirms a dominant Southern European component in Ashkenazi ancestry.
________________________________________
2. His Sephardi Admixture Inflates His Middle Eastern Component
Marks is not fully Ashkenazi—his closest matches include Sephardi Jews, which means his Middle Eastern signal is already higher than it would be for a fully Ashkenazi individual.
• Sephardi Jews have more Middle Eastern ancestry than Ashkenazim due to their history in Iberia, North Africa, and the Ottoman Empire.
• They absorbed more Levantine and North African genetic influences, while Ashkenazim absorbed more Southern European (Greco-Roman) ancestry.
How His DNA Confirms Sephardi Admixture:
• His closest non-identical matches are Sephardi Jews (Bulgaria 0.865, Turkey 1.197) rather than general Ashkenazi Jews (1.655).
• His distance to Italian Jews (1.203) is smaller than to Eastern Ashkenazim (1.707).
• His 11.6% Natufian (Levantine) ancestry is already inflated by his Sephardi side.
A fully Ashkenazi individual would likely have:
✅ Even less Natufian (Levantine) ancestry.
✅ An even stronger affinity to Southern Europe.
Thus, his argument is misleading because he is using his own Sephardi-influenced DNA to generalize about all Ashkenazim.
________________________________________
3. His Late Antiquity Roman Match Is Closer Than Medieval European Jews
In another modeling from Illustrative DNA, Marks is closer to Late Antiquity Central Italians (Rome) than to Medieval European Jews (Erfurt & Norwich):
• Late Antiquity Central Italian (Rome) – 1.919
• Medieval European Jew (Norwich) – 1.925
• Medieval European Jew (Erfurt) – 1.926
Why This Is Important:
✅ His closest ancient population is Late Antiquity Romans, showing strong Southern European influence.
✅ He is further from Medieval Ashkenazim than from Late Antiquity Romans, proving that the Ashkenazi gene pool had already diverged from its Middle Eastern roots before the Middle Ages.
This further supports the Italian bottleneck hypothesis, showing that Ashkenazim absorbed substantial Southern European ancestry before becoming an isolated community in Central and Eastern Europe.
________________________________________
4. Challenge to Marks – Debate Me on The Apricity Instead of Hiding
Marks has no problem pushing his biased narrative on YouTube, but when confronted with the facts, he resorts to blocking users instead of engaging in real debate.
He also benefits from Reddit’s Zionist-controlled moderators, who delete any account that challenges the standard Levantine-heavy narrative on Ashkenazi genetics.
So here’s my challenge:
👉 If Marks actually believes his claims, he should come to The Apricity and debate me openly.
He can’t hide behind YouTube bans or Reddit's politically motivated censorship here. If his argument is so strong, he should have no problem defending it in an open forum where he can’t simply silence opposition.
________________________________________
5. Conclusion – Marks' Own DNA Exposes His Bias
If Marks truly believes in open discussion, then let’s see him actually defend his claims here on The Apricity. Otherwise, it’s clear that his entire narrative is nothing more than politically driven pseudoscience designed to push Zionist propaganda.