Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-04 > 1050416763

From: Charles <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Asiatic Peoples part II
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:27:11 -0400
References: <>


Most people in general cannot disagree with your statement that we are
who we are. However, most people who start working on their genealogy
are trying to learn more about who we are, based on thing like where did
our ancestors came from, how did we get the surname we have. We have a
yearning within for more information about who we are and how did we get
here. A simple answer, like we are who we are, just doesn't cut it for
those of us who have the genealogy bug. That quest for factual knowledge
and truth about those that came before us is what caused us to embark on
our search and that yearning keeps those of us who have been at it a
long time, keeping on at it. We are looking for the "factual truths" and
"evidence" hidden in all the various sources of evidence and information
available, using what ever tools we can find. Genetics by Genealogy is a
new field and a new tool. Some aspects of this new field and industry
very solid. The SNP markers in us and STR repeat numbers in us "are what
we are" as you say. But we just want to be sure that the human
interpreters of what those SNPs mean, and that those who are putting
labels on those markers are being accurate. New information comes out
all the time and one's interpretation of the world must change
accordingly. This DNAPrint test is very new and the results put out by
this test is not just hard data, but is also accompanied by labels and
interpretations of the data which may not be entirely correct. And as a
genealogist when some new information comes up which does not look
right, we don't ignore it, we pursue it. I think it useful for all of us
in the long-term if we genealogists share our evidence from decades of
research with the geneticists in order for all to learn more about "who
we are" and "how we got here". I've been pursuing genealogy as a hobby
for 30 years. If I find new and proven evidence which proves prior work
wrong, after checking and double checking, I adjust accordingly. When a
piece of evidence comes up which totally disagrees with every other
piece of evidence, one must pursue the discrepancy and not ignore it,
and pursue all the evidence to find the ultimate truth which explains
all the evidence, or until some of the evidence is found to be wrong or
misinterpreted. This is what some of us are doing with the "East Asian"
label. That is are only motive. True genealogists what to learn the
truth and let the chips fall where they may. That is all we are after in
this thread about the "East Asian" label. Is it literally and factually
true and does it hold up under the scrutiny of our questions and can the
label be defended under the weight of new evidence, or is the label a
bit too specific and given false impression, and is the term "Asian" a
better interpretation of what the SNP's we have are telling us. These
labels are terms created by men based on the initial data they had to
interpret their product's results. And if their interpretations are not
correct, then they need to modify accordingly. The SNP's aren't
changing. The amount of information available and new evidence coming
forth is what is changing. And with all the new information when it is
found the facts don't meet the original hypothesis, then the hypothesis
needs to be adjusted. In the long run I think we genealogists, by
providing the geneticists and Genealogy by Genetics businesses with all
this new information, are doing a good thing, and the knowledge of all
will be increased.


> --WebTV-Mail-4167-762
> Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
> As far as I am concerned I don't care what my DNA chart says,I am who I
> am.And whether it says east asian or east european doesn't matter one
> bit.
> --WebTV-Mail-4167-762
> Content-Disposition: Inline
> Content-Type: Message/RFC822
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
> Received: from ( by
> with WTV-SMTP; Tue, 15 Apr
> 2003 00:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from ( []) by
> (WebTV_Postfix+sws) with ESMTP
> id D6933FE49 for <>; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 00:50:40
> -0700 (PDT)
> Received: (from ) by (8.12.8/8.12.8) id
> h3F3WZxw025580; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:32:35 -0600
> Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 21:32:35 -0600
> X-Original-Sender: Mon Apr 14 21:32:35 2003
> Message-ID: <>
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 20:32:40 -0700 (PDT)
> From: David Faux <>
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Asiatic Peoples part II
> Old-To:
> In-Reply-To: <>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Resent-Message-ID: <>
> To:
> Resent-From:
> Reply-To:
> X-Mailing-List: <> archive/latest/12811
> X-Loop:
> Precedence: list
> Resent-Sender:
> X-Brightmail: Message tested, results are inconclusive
> Hi Charles: Even my adult kids have to agree - sometimes my nagging works. That whole East Asian business was (as AncestrybyDNA well knows) causing controversy - not exactly good for biz. Good point about their next step being to "redraw the maps" to reflect this reality. I also have not yet heard back from Dr. Shriver about this and another matter. Goodness knows how busy he might be - or whether he is vacationing.........................whatever - will patiently await his reply. David.
> Charles <> wrote:David,
> Yes, progress appears to be being made. They have changed the label in
> the home page from East Asian to Asian. Apparently they recognize they
> indeed do have a problem with that "East Asian" name and how they are
> presenting that result. But they also need to rework all the reports and
> tables and BioGeographical maps which come with their DNAPrint test. The
> map showing the "Asian" results, group IV, and where it delineates Asian
> from Europe is still still very, very far "East". Changing their text
> reports should be easy. All they need to do is use the "global replace"
> feature in their editors and change every occurrence of the term "East
> Asian/East-Asian" with "Asian". But someone needs to rework all the maps
> and graphics too.
> Thanks for your continued follow-up efforts on this.
> I sent a follow-up email to Dr. Mark Shriver of Penna State Univ. But he
> still has not answered.
> Charles
> Dr. David K. Faux, 4028 Larwin Ave., Cypress, CA, 90630, USA
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> ==============================
> To join and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:
> --WebTV-Mail-4167-762--
> ==============================
> To join and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:

This thread: