GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1175848720
From: "Bob Bootle" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Early Population levels in the ' British peninsula '
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 09:38:40 +0100
I am grateful for your responses.
However, I am suprised that you predict that a tentative assumption,
presented in the form of a polite question, would make some people mad at
I was thinking that this is a useful mailing list.
If I have inadvertantly walked into a hornet's nest, I will soon step back.
Regarding your counter question. < Why do you need to know ?? >
I am just trying to extend my knowledge of the family tree, as I adjust to
my recent retirement. It is also part of my effort to keep my mind
> May I safely assume that most of the men were probably R1b1, with STR
> Or, Is there a more likely scenario ?
You have posed the question in two ways that are by no means
equivalent. Taking the second formulation first: no, there is no
other scenario that is more likely. However, the first formulation
cries out for a definition of "safe". Making that assumption will
not increase your risk of being in a fatal car accident. However,
it will make certain people mad at you.
The counter-question is this: why do you need to know??
|Re: [DNA] Early Population levels in the ' British peninsula ' by "Bob Bootle" <>|