GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-01 > 1136330170


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: Haplogroup I1*x
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:16:24 -0700
References: <01c001c61099$12cccc10$0101a8c0@HighReaches.local> <000801c6109a$a5aa0970$b6559045@Ken1> <43BADC99.1070901@kerchner.com> <000601c610a5$883598e0$b6559045@Ken1> <43BAF59E.7040907@kerchner.com>


Calm down Charles. FTDNA and NatGeo have sufficient cheer leading squad on
the list. A different opinion can be expressed now and then.

Ken

----- Original Message -----
From: "charles" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: Haplogroup I1*x


> Ken:
>
> You said:
> "The NatGeo/FTDNA 12 marker tests were a setback for the whole field."
>
> and then I said to you the organizations have different goals than you.
>
> And then you say:
> "But this is 2006, not 2001, and I am talking about now - the recent
> NatGeo/FTDNA collaboration. I don't think there is any reason to market
> a 12 marker haplotype today!"
>
> It's not simply different points in time and what was available then and
> what is available now ... it is different goals!
>
> FTDNA and the National Geographic Society have different goals than you
> do. They are not exploring subclades and deep subclades with the
> Genographic Project to the depth you are.
>
> I suggest you take the data where you can get it and don't bemoan so much
> that they are not providing exactly what you want for your specialized I
> haplogroup subclade project and don't be so critical of them.
>
> The large and growing 12 marker database is at least a very good pool of
> people from which you can data-mine and subsequently target people to
> suggest for upgrading to get the more specific data you want. I know you
> have done that before.
>
> I see this Genographic Project as a net positive to all of us, genetic
> genealogists and anthrogenealogists, even if the Genographic Project is
> only using 12 markers. It got a lot of people to test who would not have
> done so otherwise. We should thank them for it. It is turning into a very
> synergistic tool and a good resource for our field. I was not so sure in
> the beginning either. But I now see the Genographic Project as a net
> positive for all of us ... very much so.
>
> As to snow ... I'm a year older as of Sunday so I don't relish the idea of
> heavy snow either. But I do have an 8 horsepower Ariens snow blower. I'm
> ready for any nor-easter. We get lots of snow in PA too.
>
> Happy New Year.
>
> Charles Kerchner
> http://www.kerchner.com/dna-info.htm
>
> Ken Nordtvedt wrote:
>> But this is 2006, not 2001, and I am talking about now - the recent
>> NatGeo/FTDNA collaboration. I don't think there is any reason to market
>> a 12 marker haplotype today!
>>
>> I could list the problems with them, but I won't belabor the point.
>>
>> Ken (the new year started for me with extended driveway snowplowing
>> activities - ugh)
>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "charles" <>
>> To: <>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 1:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: Haplogroup I1*x
>>> Ken:
>>> Are you kidding with that statement? The FTDNA 12 marker test basically
>>> created this whole new field of Genetic Genealogy five years ago. Let's
>>> not be too harsh on FTDNA. As to Natl Geo's Project they are not delving
>>> into subclades to the extent you are. So don't be so harsh on these two
>>> organizations. They have different goals then you do.
>>> Welcome back. And best wishes for a happy new year.
>>> Charles Kerchner
>>> http://www.kerchner.com/dna-info.htm
>
>
>>> Ken Nordtvedt wrote:
>>>> The NatGeo/FTDNA 12 marker tests were a setback for the whole field.
>
>
> ==============================
> 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: