GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268406900


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:15:00 -0700
References: <376447.73467.qm@web25904.mail.ukl.yahoo.com><4B992A34.6060104@san.rr.com><FCA563F0-DD03-4B1E-A5ED-D1751792324B@vizachero.com><00e201cac145$82fec7c0$5e82af48@Ken1><59b150b1003111148g536d80e5he4ebb561c9048fc0@mail.gmail.com><017901cac159$4e6c7020$5e82af48@Ken1><086F1093A566477B815995B401BB889C@HP><3480483d1003111821h356097c0k9398df8feee1aaf5@mail.gmail.com><9B0B4A99411F485ABB2126B26DD996BE@HP>


Aren't you tired of this periodic outbreak? This has been going on for
years. All that has been achieved is "she defines, but he discovers!"

I find your position something like classroom canon from yesteryear and
basically intellectually claustrophobic. Some have moved on.

Go to my very recent response to Sasson for the rest of what needed to be
said.

Ken






----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>

Neither the tree nor its included groups are
> "discovered," they are human constructs used to represent the historical
> path of
> an ongoing process.



This thread: