Here’s what I could fact-check from Wikipedia.
“If you have Rh-positive blood… you have a monkey gene that can be traced to the rhesus monkey.”
False. The term “Rh” is used because it was originally found in human blood by testing it on a serum made from rabbit blood immunized with rhesus blood.
Since the entire rest of the video is based on this premise, and that premise is fundamentally flawed, one could well stop there.
“If man and ape evolved from a common ancestor, their blood would have evolved the same way.”
Which they did - apes can be Rh+ and Rh- as well.
“Modern man and rhesus monkey may have had a common ancestor”
Scratch “may” for “do”, but the rhesus isn’t exactly our closest common ancestor - the haplorhini suborder, which all Old World monkeys are part of, diverged from the rest of the primates 63 million years ago.
“If all mankind evolved from the same ancestor, their blood would be compatible. Where did the Rh-negatives come from?”
As noted above, apes can be Rh-negative as well, and this sentence discounts the fact that most humans blood isn’t even 100% compatible within the same species for reasons that have nothing to do with Rh-type.
“All animals and other living creatures known to man can breed with any other of their species”.
Good luck breeding a chihuahua to a Great Dane, though.
“Why does infant’s hemolytic disease occur in humans if all humans are the same species?”
Because it’s possible for the infant to possess antigens from the father which the mother does not possess. The same problem can occur (though it’s much less common) if a type-O mother is carrying a type-A baby.
“Nowhere else in nature does this occur naturally.”
Hemolytic disease also occurs in Thoroughbreds, and in numerous other animals, including cattle, cats, dogs, and pigs.
“No one has tried to explain where the Rh-negative people come from.”
Yes, they have. See above. The presence of the Rh antigen is governed by the presence of the RHD gene. If you have it, you’re Rh+; if you don’t, you’re Rh-. No “missing link to the stars” is necessary.
“Rh negative blood (type O) is the purest blood known to mankind.”
Rh- and type O are not the same thing - 36.44% of the human race is O+.
“There are certain similarities that occur to those having Rh negative blood; can not be cloned, higher than average IQ, mostly red haired, blond with green eyes and black haired, with hazel eyes but also blue eyes.”
So Rh- people have either blonde, red, or black hair, and their eyes are either green, brown, or blue? That’s far too generalized to make any assertions based on.
And no human being has ever been cloned, so I don’t know how he came to that other conclusion.
“Extra rib or vertebrae”
The cervical rib only appears in 0.2% of the population and shows no correlation with blood type.
You were certainly right about the video going off the deep end at the 4-minute mark, but I’m fairly sure nobody has ever done a study linking blood type to psychic powers or “capability to disrupt electronic appliances”, and James Randi’s million dollar challenge to prove that any of these phenomena exist is still standing.
“Erich von Daniken has Rh- blood type”
Wasn’t able to verify if this was true, because when I searched for “von Daniken blood type” all I got was more pages with this same text on it.