GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-03 > 1173905698


From: "Alfred A. Aburto Jr." <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] OmniPop caution received from FamilyTreeDNA
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 13:54:36 -0800
References: <cdb.9c8bb2a.33283343@aol.com> <45F6F8C5.9030209@sbcglobal.net> <45F767C0.9010501@mchsi.com> <45F78B4D.7020001@sbcglobal.net> <40A3F6B4-5ED4-4C59-BF0B-E33FC2572CEC@vizachero.com> <45F85441.90702@sbcglobal.net><F389E53E-15B0-4A02-8308-9CCF1D9E35F1@vizachero.com>
In-Reply-To: <F389E53E-15B0-4A02-8308-9CCF1D9E35F1@vizachero.com>


> Vincent Vizachero wrote:

>Even if the population size were known, OmniPop, RCMP, ENFSI, etc.
>would still not be well suited to matching admixed individuals to
>their ancestral populations.
>
>It is no good adding more data to OmniPop (either populations or
>their sizes): it is the method that is the problem.
>
>Vince
>
>

Where is the fault with the method?
Al

This thread: