GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-07 > 1059530457
From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V03 #495
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 19:00:57 -0700 (PDT)
To one David from another David:
First I have to say that I agree wholeheartedly with much of what you say - I was about to "unsubscribe" if I saw another DAR posting.
In my opinion, however, you are quite wrong about the DNAPrint test and everyone "dissing" it. Last night I included information that indicated cross - validation between the DNAPrint test and genealogy. There is much to be learned about this particular measure - its just that some people seem to disconect their mouth from their brain in discussing the test.
What troubles me most is that you on one hand appear to agree the the rights of indigenous people is not a topic suitable for this list - amen. However, then your enter into a long diatribe as to your opinions about "enrolled" Native Americans - basically entering into precisely the sort of dialogue you complain bitterly about - I don't get it, do you?
DNA + genealogy - period. If those two elements are not in the posting then the individual is straying from the purpose of this List. I am not your hidden complainer (I am guilty of communicating with Ann that the DAR topic had strayed way too far from DNA and should be brought to a close).
The other David (F.).
dfeedspm <> wrote:
Sent: 07/29/03 06:00 PM
Subject: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V03 #495
1") The list is titled GENEALOGY-DNA. It's not for a discussion of the rights of indigenous people or similar diatribes. I'm not interested in reading
arguments regarding this or other non-genealogy related issues."
Ann, thanks for the reminder "from they whom must stay hidden."
Maybe while we are at it, as to complaining about irritants, please,no more redundant thread complaints regarding the DNA print test.
We all know by now, as we are reminded over and over and over again constantly, it is either a fraud, or valid.
As to "the rights of indigenous people " discussion on a DNA geneology list,I agree.
Speaking as someone that has been told, by a geneologist that focuses on "NA" geneology, that I am "indigenious", I will agree to stay the hell out of DNA geneology land, if DNA geneology stays forever more, the hell out of "Indian" country.
DNA geneology, as it is being applied to "indigenious people", is in my opinion, racist in nature and is attempted eurocentric classification genocide, the modern "white peoples new dawes act", designed to determine by eurocentric scientific methodology, classifcation of "Indians" under racist eurocentric methdology percentages ,instead of allowing "Indians" to self determine themselves.
That DNA geneology "NA" percentage classification is BS also BTW, no such thing as a "NA". Indians are known by other Indians as enrolled members of Indian Nations, members of tribes or bands, kin and blood relations, not pan generic "NA"s by DNA percentages
Culture determins a "Indian", not DNA geneology methdology + or - infinity error results of "NA" percentages on a DNA print test. Some of the arguments posted here on the topic are laughable, in their ignorance of "NA"'s in general.
I do hope that this post passes the litmus test of your hidden complainer, and the list guidelines as to DNA geneology and "indigenious peoples" discussion
Yours in open list dialogue always
To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:
Dr. David K. Faux, P.O. Box 192, Seal Beach, CA, 90740, USA
|Re: [DNA] Re: GENEALOGY-DNA-D Digest V03 #495 by David Faux <>|