GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-06 > 1181255145


From: "R. & G. Stevens" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Megalith Builders
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 18:24:44 -0500
References: <193461.9133.qm@web52111.mail.re2.yahoo.com><000801c7a621$3606dee0$6401a8c0@Richard><REME20070605172210@alum.mit.edu><007c01c7a7c9$4574dc20$6401a8c0@Richard><REME20070607155824@alum.mit.edu>


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Chandler" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] Megalith Builders



> You thought I was being caustic?? No, indeed. I was being extremely
> gentle. Most people have a soft spot in their hearts for swashbucklers.
> The fact is that a correlation is a quantitative relationship between
> variables attached to the same set of study objects, whereas what you
> are claiming is nothing like that. The Y-DNA haplogroups are measured
> *now*, and the languages *could* be determined *now*, but you are not
> basing your claim on any such objective measure. Instead, you are
> assuming genetic continuity to carry the modern DNA back to a varying
> set of times in the past, of your own choice, when you believe the
> very limited clues about languages give a simple enough picture. And
> the conclusion you are attempting to draw from this exercise is that
> genetic continuity cannot be assumed!
>
> John Chandler
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I didn't claim anything like what you are saying. I merely said there is a
correlation between certain y-haplogroups and certain language families. I
believe that is self-evidently true.

But you were right about my use of the word caustic. I was wrong. I should
have said self-important.

Rich

This thread: