Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268515488

From: "Ricardo Costa de Oliveira" <>
Subject: [DNA] RES: Ethnic core, social class structure and DNA
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:24:48 -0300
In-Reply-To: <BAY132-DS944633D9F88679F5350379E300@phx.gbl>

Yes Sean. Genetic genealogy may be very important to be kept under the
scientific monopoly of a few geneticists. New ideas, new concepts, new
projects, new hypothesis are ready to be implemented and tested with the
assistance of a multidisciplinary team. Geneticists are good laboratorists,
not necessary good scientific formulators in the fields of history,
demographic history, sociology, anthropology, conventional genealogy, for
example. A qualitative approach could help a lot. Applying to public funding
can raise several questions. Genetic genealogy resembles astronomy where the
"amateurs" or "hobbyists" can be sometimes in the forefront of new insights
and new discoveries and breakthroughs.We must wait new iniciatives like the
FTDNA-WTY and expect the full genome sequence of the Y chromosome in some
selected clades as a first step, we need more world wide long STR data, but
we need to get more useful ideas and more intelligent research proposals in
order to move ahead this new science. Sampling is decisive to get
comprehensive results. Probably the private databases of FTDNA and SMGF have
been contributing more to the development of genetic genealogy than the
"professional" articles in the last three years. Battles of legitimacy are
good news and I agree that "genetic genealogy as a science is still in its
relative infancy in terms of where it can go".



This thread: