GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-01 > 1137186352


From: "Eric Olson" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Y-STR testing rate slowing down?
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 13:05:52 -0800


Carol,

My sense is that with the advent of online genealogical sites, such as
RootsWeb, GenForum, GenWeb etc., there has been a great sharing of
genealogical information which was researched in the old fashioned way -
visits to courthouses, cemeteries, LDS microfilmed archives, the commercial
disks, and so forth. Suddenly there was a way to share using the Internet.
That era of sharing of traditionally garnered genealogical information has
about ended because it has all been shared. I know I was able to take a
traditional, pre-Internet genealogy back one generation with the help of
the connectivity of the Internet. But now that seems to have ended. The
easy stuff has been done.

So it's back to the yet-to-be-transcribed archives by the serious
genealogists, and forward with genetic genealogy which actually does seem
to leap too far ahead in many cases. I think the 'new' concept of
genealogical time is gradually seeping into our conscience ness, and that
it will ultimately limit our genealogy to the advent of the adoption of
surnames, perhaps around 1500 or so, depending upon the time and place of
our earliest known ancestors. Back beyond that is simply generic
population studies. Whether the two will ever match up and meet is an open
question in each case. That is, will prehistoric population studies ever
directly yield useful information for surname genealogy ? I personally
doubt it, except in those cases where DNA studies are used to confirm or
deny existing genealogical paper trails.

Eric Olson




> [Original Message]
> From: <>
> To: <>
> Date: 1/13/2006 8:44:58 AM
> Subject: RE: [DNA] Y-STR testing rate slowing down?
>
>
> Terry Barton writes:
> My sense is that awareness of the value of DNA testing to genealogy
> continues to spread in the general population and that our genetic
genealogy
> efforts are becoming more widely accepted. I think that is great.
>
> Carol writes:
> Terry, I can't agree with you more about how valuableDNA testing has
become to the wonderful world of genealogy. I think that DNA testing IS
becomming more and more accepted, but I am wondering if the interest in
'traditional' genealogy is on the wane. Like a perfect fool, I am
researching EVERY known direct ancestor that I can identify. I have 391
'direct' ancestors identified to date -- not including some 20-30 that I
don't feel are well documented. That's a lot of surnames to follow. On
virtually every surname that I am interested in, there has been a
noticeable fall off in postings to forums like GenForum or rootsweb. [I
don't access the ancestry.com message boards, so I can't speak to their
level of activity.] It is just my observation in all of surnames that I am
interested in that over the past two years or so, the kind of white-hot
interest in genealogy that was palpable about five to eight years ago has
significantly diminished. This would ultimately affect!
> DNA testing, if I'm right. Do others have this same impression??
>
> Carol Vass
> Kent, WA
>
>
> ==============================
> 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: