GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-05 > 1146832113


From: Bonnie Schrack <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] I1b vs. J
Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 08:28:33 -0400


Lawrence wrote:

>My Ysearch username is HZU4N. FTDNA has predicted my haplogroup to be I1b,
>as does Whit Athey's predictor. The latter actually gives a score of 86 for
>I1b, but also 45 for J.
>
>In looking at my rather distant partial matches in Ysearch, I noticed that
>they all were similarly declared as I1b (or I or unknown) except for one,
>V96RM, which is declared as J2. Taken by curiosity, I entered his STR
>markers into Athey's predictor, which resulted in a 76 score for I1b and
>only 43 for J. I have just now sent a message to V96RM, asking whether his
>haplogroup is confirmed or merely predicted, but I don't know whether he
>will respond.
>
>What do you all think of a situation like this?
>

I think you should not be influenced by the fact that one person who is
a distant, partial match at Ysearch, has a different haplogroup listed
than yours.

Whit's predictor is very accurate. But there are other ways to estimate
haplogroups, of course, based on the patterns of key markers. Your
haplotype does not look very J-ish to me, based on the hundreds I've
studied.

I must say that V96RM does not look like a J, either, but has a pattern
similar to yours.

> If V96RM really is a J2,
>then perhaps I am also? And perhaps also many others who were "predicted"
>as I1b?
>
Not likely! I and J are related groups, and it's natural that there are
some vague similarities.

> Or is it more likely that V96RM himself is more a case of wishful
>thinking--e.g., a desire to "prove" "real" Jewish ancestry?
>
I would never have thought of that. I think that saying "Please don't
anyone take offense" is a poor substitute for basic courtesy and
consideration of others, which would dictate not expressing a hypothesis
like that which assumes motives that are less than scientific, to say
the least. If he were a list participant he could at least speak up for
himself, but we don't know that he is.

I think it is far more likely that V96RM, like so many others in
Ysearch, was confused about his correct haplogroup for any of a variety
of reasons.

> (Please don't
>anyone take offense. I have simply seen various cases in which genetic test
>results are "re-interpreted" by people who wish to "prove" that their yDNA
>matches their image of themselves and their ancestors. One Irish person
>even "re-interpreted" his E3b haplogroup as a lost tribe of Israel that
>crossed northern Africa, conquered France, and invented Gaelic on its way to
>Ireland!)
>
>
If this is a pet peeve, then please address your objections to the
person who did what you found problematic, don't ascribe them to someone
who has probably never heard of such a theory.

There is certainly a small group who engage in that kind of speculation,
and this has been extensively discussed on the list. The ideology has
roots going back to the past century, at least. It's not really
something I feel any interest in re-hashing, and in fact doing so may
only make its proponents feel that they are taken more seriously.

>The real bottom-line question is: Should I bother spending the $80 to get a
>so-called deep-subclade test, merely to absolutely confirm my I1b? Or
>should I be satisfied with the results of Athey's predictor?
>
Whether you pay for a "deep clade" test is up to you -- people have
various reasons for taking those. They can be valuable contributions to
research in many cases. But I don't know whether yours is one of
those. Ken would have to speak on that point.

Bonnie



This thread: