GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-09 > 1221674706


From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] What shall R1b1c call themselves now?
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 14:05:06 -0400
References: <091720081159.28490.48D0F12200024EDA00006F4A220075074490019C019704050E@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <091720081159.28490.48D0F12200024EDA00006F4A220075074490019C019704050E@comcast.net>(aklyosov@comcast.net)


Anatole wrote:
> In other words, you are talking about familial studies, while I am talking on
> history-related studies, in you wish, which include a multitude of familial lineages.

No, exactly the opposite. We were talking about PREhistoric-related
studies. More precisely, I was emphasizing what such studies cannot
reveal. Don't be misled by my insistence that the pool of potential
test subjects includes all living male-line descendants of the founding
ancestor of an entire haplogroup -- that is neither a promise to test
the entire pool nor even an assertion that such a huge effort would
be feasible or appropriate. The point is that there is a definite
limit on the information that can be obtained from studying the
present-day population, no matter how assiduous the study. Anyone
in the past who either has no living (male-line) descendants or whose
living (male-line) descendants are all descended from just one son
is simply out of reach.

John Chandler

This thread: