GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268613893


From: "Tom Gull" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] English genealogy
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:44:53 -0400
References: <13d1a.4610bb6f.38ce8c73@aol.com><35bbfc2c1003141321t1a7153a0o4081df2e8fc15731@mail.gmail.com><SNT131-ds68AD6AE4850563345A61EBC2F0@phx.gbl><ea3bd9561003141713v14833308y4fbbfb6839060292@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ea3bd9561003141713v14833308y4fbbfb6839060292@mail.gmail.com>


David, did I even mention you or your research? I have read your documents,
no less. I think you extrapolate a great deal from small and biased samples,
but I think that generally of today's work, so I wouldn't take that
personally.

In any case, I was responding to a comment about how Americans dislike
having their pet royalty hypothesis zapped and noting that Y-DNA and mtDNA
discussions don't really address that issue. I was also noting that a
surprising number of Americans may actually have such ancestry (along with a
ton of British cousins in the same boat).

Other points relating to your tangential message:
1. I have no "cause" unless it's to remind people not to jump to
conclusions too early or with inadequate data.
2. I'm fine with whatever valid sources and techniques people use to
hypothesize probable ancestral origins.
3. I'm fine with discarding hypotheses when facts prove them incorrect or
the evidence is simply too thin. I have removed Mayflower ancestors and
royal ancestors from my own hypothesized lineage when I have uncovered
questionable links or facts that simply disprove them. The data rules, and
poor quality data or insufficient data should always be recognized as such.
4. I'm not very frustrated about not being able to trace ancestry back
across the Pond, actually, since I have over 500 identified immigrant
couples to date.
5. I have no expectations that there is or should be an American or British
mindset towards genealogy or genetic research and have been frankly
extremely bored by the message traffic going back and forth about it. I
routinely delete most of those messages now without reading them. They seem
mostly to be individuals complaining that some other group's behavior
doesn't match their expectations and that strikes me as being kind of a
futile concern most of the time.
6. If I want to "take a pot shot" at you, I will mention you by name. If I
don't, please assume you and your work haven't even crossed my mind.

Thanks / Tom



This thread: