GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2009-07 > 1248048553


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Who killed the men of England -
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:09:13 -0600
References: <65129899-5600-4649-B875-9CDBF6816259@earthlink.net><3b2a446a0907191321p3f0a566ah7a3970747bdfc6c2@mail.gmail.com><005a01ca08b3$c2de57c0$6400a8c0@Ken1><128A85B892F64BF186346574509B9DC2@john><003d01ca08c6$6f96c8a0$6400a8c0@Ken1><FD8CA74ADBCA4EDE9DFBFE8E8F92D65B@john>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Alister John Marsh" <>

If you or some
> others don't see a correlation between mathematical estimates and
> archaeology, it does not necessarily mean that either the archaeologists
> of
> the mathematicians are right, and the other wrong, or that either
> mathematics or archaeology are "irrelevant".

[[ I think that most of the alleged connections between the genetic time
lines and archaeological time lines are excessively forced too soon, as if
they have to be tied at the hip at this early state of the field. That's my
main complaint. ]]

>
> When you carefully selected your words "this list can get SWAMPED by other
> subjects", was that intended a reference to me?

[[ You give me way too much credit for linquistic cleverness and craft ---
that's not one of my strong points. ]]


This thread: