GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2002-04 > 1018149141


From: <>
Subject: [DNA] Re: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V02 #157
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002 19:12:25 -0800
In-Reply-To: <200204070024.g370O3h02346@lists5.rootsweb.com>


> ______________________________
> From: "Paul Hendrickseen" <>

>
>> From: "Dennis Garvey" <>
>> The Y-chromosome testing advertisement quoted earlier made a claim that
>> simply isn't true. The problem was with the phrase:
>>
>>> You can now scientifically prove your descent from any of these
>>> legends of American history.
>>
>> No. No you can't. That's the problem.
>
> I don't agree with you. Genealogy.com claim is true. Here is why:
>
> If someone hasn't done any research in the past, and starts plain and simply
> with a DNA test, and his results match those of one or more proven
> descendants of a legendary figure, what if, prompted by these results, he
> starts his family tree, establishing connection to these people that have
> proof of direct connection to one of these legendary figures? Wasn't this
> DNA test essential to prove his own connection?

In this case the DNA test didn't prove it, the genealogical research did.
The DNA test was merely a tool.

I believe the answer is
> plainly yes. Therefore, Genealogy.com assertion isn't false at all.

Descent from any historical figure can not be "scientifically" proven,
though it may be "proven" with traditional genealogical research. I say the
statement is false.

Sean Dixon

This thread: