GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211052642


From: "Peter A. Kincaid" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] 12 STR tests are useful (was Re: Some truth inarticle(wasRe: Answer from Ancestors Magazine))
Date: Sat, 17 May 2008 16:30:42 -0300
References: <170684.52703.qm@web90401.mail.mud.yahoo.com><7kincaids%40primus.ca$142.154.19.142$.5E83FF626EE64B91B24FFAA1B62F5029@PeterAKincaiPC><D02A9CF2-E5B4-434C-B431-F436CA5AE732@vizachero.com><7kincaids%40primus.ca$142.154.18.220$.2DF3580E09BA4E3D9A5289AAF839AE79@PeterAKincaiPC><F571FF75-B610-447E-BC92-8CB94E89A385@vizachero.com>
In-Reply-To: <F571FF75-B610-447E-BC92-8CB94E89A385@vizachero.com>


Your own words wipe out your argument
and supports mine. It is a worthwhile objective
to use the best tool for the job. A 37 marker
test is better than and 25 marker test which is
better than 12 markers. I think there are
people on this list wise enough to use the higher
resolution tools. I suppose in your world it
would be great to still be able to buy Commodore
VIC 20s. Sure there could be a use for them,
but a person buying their first computer so they
can surf the Internet will later be ticked off if they
were led to believe a VIC 20 would do.

Peter


----- Original Message -----
From: "Vincent Vizachero" <>
To: <>
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2008 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] 12 STR tests are useful (was Re: Some truth in
article(wasRe: Answer from Ancestors Magazine))


> The only worthwhile objective is to find the best tool for the job.
> There are plenty of people in the field who recognize that, thankfully.
>
> If you someone can't figure out how to use a 12 marker test
> productively, that is no one's business but theirs I suppose, but
> hopefully people on this list are wise enough to recognize that the
> problem lies in the implementor and not in the implement.
>
> Vince
>
>
> On May 17, 2008, at 12:24 PM, Peter A. Kincaid wrote:
>
>> You are confusing ulterior objectives with "know better."

This thread: