GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268420060
From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:54:20 -0500
"When I said clades were properties of the y tree (part of independently
existing nature) whether or not yet discovered by any of us, I forgot to add
that the clades were demographic properties of the y tree with or without
(independent of) any mutational tags (STRs, SNPs, etc.) we had as tools to
find the clades. The tags do not make the clades; the demographic events
collectively make the clades."
So defined, these are not phylogenetic clades, nor is the process cladistics.
It's cultural anthropology.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Ken Nordtvedt
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 1:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
> > So, Ken's "Jewish clades" and "Christian clades"
> monophyletic, I presume
> > based
> > on his assertion that clades are defined by their "demographic
> > properties," not
> > their "tags" (genetic mutations). Ooookay.
> [[ Clades are not defined, they are discovered. So they are
> not defined by
> demographic properties. They are the RESULT of demographic processes.
> Ken has no Christian clades because he has not been doing
> ydna research in
> exotic places like China or India where historic Christian
> clades could
> conceivably show up.
> And yes, concerning the Jewish clades in haplogroup I,
> specifically, each
> shows strong evidence of a present-day population of males
> descending from a
> single male centuries ago.
> That was explicitly stated in an earlier message. ]]
|Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA by "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>|