GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2002-04 > 1018162263


From: "Allan S. Gleason" <>
Subject: [DNA] Yes it is. No it isn't, Yes it is,..........
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2002 23:51:03 -0700
References: <B8D4F919.14C38%sleep66@earthlink.net>


Actually, the words "descended" and "proves" in the ad were an error and I'm pretty
certain that Bennett will have them changed - if he can - in future ads.

It is my understanding that the way that those particular famous persons can be
"related" is because FTDNA has already gotten the haplotypes from descendants (or
cousins?) who in turn have firm paper evidence of their relationship to those heroes
of the past. So if your haplotype matches theirs, you're allowed to join the club.

At any rate, descendancy is never proved by Ycs DNA alone, but relationship can be
strongly indicated. The ad men simply got carried away (including Patrick's
exclamation marks)!!!!! :>)

Allan


wrote:

> > ______________________________
> > 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
>
> ==============================
> To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:
> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237

This thread: