Resurrection.
A physicist specializing in radiation effects (quoted indirectly in leaked discussions) reportedly put it bluntly:
And that’s where the first major red flag appears:
The biological material didn’t behave like normal human DNA.
PART 4 — The ‘Kopstock Report’: The Alleged Document That Vanished
Then comes the part that fuels the cover-up theory.
A supposed internal report began circulating quietly around 2009 — a document reportedly seen by theologians and insiders close to sensitive relic research.
It became known in whispers as the Kopstock Report.
And according to the claims now resurfacing, it summarized confidential genetic analysis of multiple relics believed to be connected to Jesus, including:
the Shroud of Turin
the Sudarium of Oviedo
But the line that allegedly stunned those who read it was this:
“The chromosomal structure is not consistent with a normal human male. The paternal contribution cannot be identified through known human haplogroups.”
Let that sink in.
A male child should inherit a Y chromosome from his biological father. That’s basic genetics.
But the leaked claim suggests something that borders on the unthinkable:
maternal markers were present… but paternal markers were incomplete, fragmented — and reportedly non-classifiable.
One scientist allegedly described it as a “signature outside evolutionary phylogeny.”
“This DNA does not have a biological father.”
If that line is true, it wouldn’t just challenge science or religion.
It would rewrite history.
So what happened next?
The report reportedly disappeared.
Publicly dismissed as unofficial.
Privately rumored to have been softened, edited, or rewritten.
And yet — according to those familiar with the alleged leak — too many people had seen too much for it to ever be fully erased.
PART 5 — Late 2025: A Geneticist Breaks His Silence
Now the story takes a darker turn.
In late 2025, investigative journalists were allegedly contacted by a retired researcher whose identity is being withheld for safety reasons.
He claimed to have worked on mitochondrial DNA sampling from first-century Middle Eastern ossuaries — including controversial bone collections linked to claims about Jesus’ family.
And then he dropped a bombshell:
Among fragments of bone dust and calcified residue, his team found a sample labeled “Yeshua.”
It was initially set aside because its mitochondrial DNA appeared to match that of a woman labeled “Mariam.”
But then came the shock:
Continue reading…
