GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-08 > 1187541316


From: Doug McDonald <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] new VP at DAR?
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:35:16 -0500
References: <20755895.1187533995182.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <20755895.1187533995182.JavaMail.root@elwamui-chisos.atl.sa.earthlink.net>


Bob McLaren wrote:

> DNA testing has to go far beyond 67 markers and the current crop of SNPs before it MAY be useful
> for lineage societies. At present, DNA testing will not allow you to determine if you are
> descended from a PARTICULAR person, just that you are related.
>


There is one case where it can be definitive. Say you have two
and only two people in a small town named say "John Coates".
One is called "Big John" and the other one "Little John", and
they are not known to be related. Each has two known sons, known because
they have different wives names, and are identified in records
as to which John they are sons of. I have a case of ancestors that
is almost like this. You have a fifth son of John Coates ... but you don't know
which John. If they two Johns are in fact unrelated, and you have living
male lines to all five, you have your clear answer. Unfortunately
my two Johns turn out to be very closely related, as was expected.

If there were a case like this, the DAR would quite possibly
accept the DNA evidence. (The SAR would of course be more direct,
but the DAR would be as appropriate if the lady who
was applying had their usual quality known relation to the tested man.)

Doug McDonald

This thread: