GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268504740
From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:25:40 -0500
Ken said they were:
> "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."
> I believe my position on what y tree clades are has rather completely
> been spelled out over the past.
I'm sorry, but I don't remember what you've said in the past, but you are
supporting Ken, so I presume you agree with him.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Vincent Vizachero
> Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 1:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA
> Exactly. This is the strawman. No one said that clades are defined
> by their demographic properties, so what are you protesting?
> On Mar 13, 2010, at 1:01 PM, Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote:
> > Y-DNA haplogroups (clades) are not defined by their demographic
> > properties, they are defined by the polarity of their SNP mutations.
|Re: [DNA] Clades, Definitions, Discoveries, FTDNA by "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>|