GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119900100


From: John Conley <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Macro vs. Micro View of Genetic Genealogy
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:21:40 -0400
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050627111512.03aabb60@lafn.org> <00b501c57b49$84cec6a0$1a466144@valuediebi9vu4>
In-Reply-To: <00b501c57b49$84cec6a0$1a466144@valuediebi9vu4>


One method of managing the volume of email is to use a service such as gmail
from google or set up folders and have the mail directed there.

The advantage of gmail at google is simply that this whole tread appears as
a folder and I can archive or delete the entire folder at any time.

Thus I get about 10 emails a day from the list, sorted into folders by type.

If this interests you I have 50 accounts to 'give away' each with 2Gigabytes
of free storage as the email is web based.

If interested, contact me off list.


On 6/27/05, Gary Rea <> wrote:
>
> LOL. Hey, don't forget the folks who only want to discuss R1B, or some
> other
> haplotype. Then there are those whose thing is Vikings. ;)
>
> Gary
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert Davenport" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 1:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Macro vs. Micro View of Genetic Genealogy
>
>
> > It seems to me, you need 3 lists, one for Y DNA 37 marker people, one
> for
> > MtDNA, and one for the SNP people and their haplogroups. They definitely
> > seem to be three different discussions.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 07:46 AM 6/27/2005, you wrote:
> >>I don't know about you, but it seems evident to me that this list has
> been
> >>completely taken over by those whose focus is entirely upon the very
> >>broad-brush picture of ancestry provided by MtDNA studies, as opposed to
> >>the reason most of us got into genetic genealogy in the first place; i.e
> .,
> >>to use Y-DNA data in conjunction with our "paper trail" research to find
> >>specific ancestors with known names. Whatever happened to that?
> >>
> >>Endless discussions of the technical details of haplotypes that include
> >>half the people of Europe and endless speculations over which band of
> >>nameless, faceless paleolithic ancestors migrated to where from where
> have
> >>just left me so numb I don't even bother to read the posts on this list
> >>anymore. How about getting back to the root purpose of surname studies;
> >>i.e., breaking down brickwalls in conventional research and finding
> >>connections to specific, known individuals? After you know you're an R1B
> >>and your ancestors migrated out of Africa and across the Eurasian
> >>continent, what else is there to know about them? Will I ever know their
> >>names? No. Will I ever know anything about how they lived their
> individual
> >>lives? Only to the extent that archaeology can provide any evidence of
> >>specific settlements.
> >>
> >>Am I the only one who feels the need for a separate list for those of us
> >>who run surname studies, or participate in them, and whose focus is upon
> >>establishing links between ancestors who lived in historical times?
> >>
> >>Gary
> >>
> >>
> >>==============================
> >>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
> >
>
>
> ==============================
> Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the
> areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months.
> Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx
>
>


--
John Conley Sr.


This thread: