GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1110473588


From: ellen Levy <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: DNA Print test
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 08:53:08 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: 6667


Malcolm:

Based on your reasoning, then every haplogroup we are
studying (R1b, R1a, etc) is really African? And your
actually postulating that R1b and R1a originated in
the "cradle of civilization" (let's just call it the
Middle East, OK?)? Please provide genetic proof for
such a contention - and not just by using some human
history maps utilized by AncestrybyDNA, whose
so-called scientific analysis I'm questioning anyway.
Using valid published DNA data, prove that R1a & R1b
originated in the Middle East. Because if you can do
this, you have far surpassed what any geneticist has
so far been able to do in their explorations of the
origins of these two haplogroups.

And your not reading my responses accurately. I
didn't say that R1b originated in the Ice Age. I said
it "got stuck" in the LGM. In either case, it
originated in Europe, correct?

Congratulations- you are obviously much more of an
"old timer" on this list than I am, so don't want
information "regurgitated." However, I don't consider
myself a newbie and rarely does the autosomal process
and information apparently utilized by this company
get discussed in depth on this this. Why? Because
none of us really know what that process is.

Yes, we can all pick apart the convoluted graph that
DNAPrint provides as your "result." But did you read
John & Ray's discussions on this graph? Unless you
are a mathematical genius, it's enough to give you a
migraine headache.

I understand that we on this List are all obsessive
consumers of DNA tests. Its a delightful little
addiction. I also understand that DNAPrint is the
only test available that proports to tell use what our
racial makeup is. But that doesn't make the test
scientifically sound. We can't even judge its
scientific soundness because we don't have any data to
do so, do we?

I'm tired of hearing the confidential proprietary
research excuse. Release enough data so that there
can be some peer review and a determination whether
these tests bear up under scientific standards and
scrutiny. Concerns about property rights and
financial protections are dealt with every day in our
legal system through the use of copyright and patents.

One last thing. No one is arguing that Native
American DNA shows Y chromosome & MtDNA links with
Central and South Asian populations. You can just
access the DNA studies in FTDNA's library to read
about that connection. It also appears to go back
between 20,000-12,000 year ago. Nothing recent.

Further, links between Asian & Native American groups
does not necessarily translate to links between
European or Middle Eastern or Jewish groups and Native
Americans. That's a leap of faith that is
inappropriate in a scientific DNA field. If you want
to prove such a link, then prove it through the DNA
data. Don't ask us to make a leap of faith.

Well, I'm off to respond to Ann's posting on DNAPrint.
Ta-Ta.

Ellen Coffman

--- Malcolm Dodd <> wrote:
> Malcolm, why do I have to go to the List archives to
> try to dig up information the testing procedures and
> markers used by AncestrybyDNA? The company bears a
> responsibility, not the List, to provide this
> information to their participants, the public and
> fellow scientists.
>
> Answer - many on this list have been here for years
> and do not want the
> same old information regurgitated; that is why I say
> it is in the
> archives (which are easy to search)
> The company has carried out it's responsibility to
> provide our markers
> to participants.
> You may see the autosomal markers of me and others
> here -
> http://members.aol.com/dnafiler/genotypes.xls
>
> >
>
> ==============================
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million
> records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the
> world. Learn more:
> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx
>
>




This thread: