GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2002-12 > 1040447192
From: "Georgia K. Bopp" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DYS464
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:06:32 -1000
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
In yesterday's post I managed to make a fool of myself once again on this
list (esp. if anyone visited my website Draft).
However, for the record, I do want to state that, yes, I do know the people
in the two examples on the site are way too far apart to be related. Some
people thought I was so obtuse that I didn't even know that (but they were
nice about it).
But that was not the problem. I just wanted to know how the calculation was
done. I wanted to know how to get 7 to be 6 and 40 to be 30.
In follow up emails with FTDNA, I was referred back to their recent
newsletter (mentioned by Ann in the original post) regarding DYS 464 and all
its friends and reminded of the DYS 389 (i and ii) information at Kevin's
site. I forwarded the info to my spouse at work who, after reading it,
instantly turned 40 into 30. When he came home, he managed to teach me to
do the same.
Now I've tried to explain it on my website. Links to Kevin's info and the
newsletter are included at the site. With my track record, I don't really
expect anyone to go there - but if you do, comments are welcome.
By the way, there will be no genetic distance numbers reported on our
official results page. BUT - one of these days we may have two results
with numbers that "appear" to add up to 3 or 4 but are adjusted to a genetic
distance of 1 or 2. At least now I can explain this to any participant who
wants to know why.
|Re: [DNA] DYS464 by "Georgia K. Bopp" <>|