GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-01 > 1073185595


From: (Raymond Whritenour)
Subject: [DNA] DNAPrint Test Worked for Me
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 22:06:41 -0500 (EST)


Lucy:

As I said before: I tried my best to show you the light. You choose to
"believe" in the accuracy of the DNAPrint 2.0 BGA test. Please let us
all know when you have actually confirmed, through documentary evidence,
that the woman in your photograph was really an American Indian. (I
can't understand why your uncle, who's had this photograph, never
noticed this before taking the DNAPrint test.) That will make you the
first person, known to this list, who ever sought and found proof of NA
ancestry after discovering NA minor ancestry with the DNAPrint test.

Everyone has possible ancestry in all four categories, whether or not
that ancestry was shown on the old triangle charts. (The new format
does show all four.)

Yes, it is "statistically possible" for siblings to be 20% NA and 0% NA,
respectively. JUST BARELY POSSIBLE! Now tell us how "possible" is it
for one sister to be 9% NA, 0% EA and the other sister 9% EA, 0% NA?
We've seen this one, too.

Ray Whritenour

This thread: