GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-03 > 1268637014


From: Angela Cone <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] The tree house definition (was: Clades, Definitions,Discoveries, FTDNA)
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:10:14 +1300
References: <c9518c821003142019l4e0fcacbr6d1c267221d11a7a@mail.gmail.com><019d01cac3f6$30f76050$5e82af48@Ken1><c9518c821003142135l4db87acpb836b8cfb96a6f12@mail.gmail.com><01c801cac3fe$f723aba0$5e82af48@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <01c801cac3fe$f723aba0$5e82af48@Ken1>


Yes Ken,.. I agree with your statement:
"Bringing and sharpening authentic disagreement on essential things to the
light of day, if they exist, is really the guts of useful scientific
discussion."

However to do that, it helps to really be sure that the disagreement is
really genuine disagreement. If an argument is 90% misunderstanding and 10%
genuine disagreement it is more helpful to establish the points of reference
properly so the 10% real disagreement can be given adequate discussion
rather than wasting time on the 90% that is essentially a matter of
semantics.

clades = collections of descendants from single
sources/founders/MRCAs/origins

The above might seem like a clear definition to you but it's actually quite
broad and could equally apply to discussions about the "tree" or discussions
about the "treehouse". In genetic genealogy the term clade is used in
several different contexts.
What ensures that people are talking about the same thing, is having
specific terminology with specific meanings.... thus all the harping on
about definitions and the like isn't superfluous pedantic timewasting,..
What wastes time is assuming that everyone is talking about the same thing
(when they are not).

I'm not trying to brush "fundamental disagreement"under the rug,.. I''m just
merely suggesting that people step back to consider whether some of the
disagreement can be resolved by clarification of the points of reference.

Angela
(who currently needs to stop writing e-mails, and ascertain what heinous
acts of mischief her toddler "Captain Chaos" is currently committing")

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Ken Nordtvedt <>wrote:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Angela Cone" <>
>
> > We need definitions to make sure that people are talking about the same
> > thing. [[ Well sure ]]
>
> [[ It was established that we were talking about:
>
> clades = collections of descendants from single
> sources/founders/MRCAs/origins
>
> Specifically, collections of y haplotypes descended from single ancestral y
> haplotypes (the founders or MRCAs)
>
>
> I really don't think you should try to brush under the rug fundamental
> disagreements on essential things by ascribing it to misunderstandings with
> words or definitions,
> unless you are really sure you can explain that fully that's the case.
> Bringing and sharpening authentic disagreement on essential things to the
> light of day, if they exist, is really the guts of useful scientific
> discussion. Ken ]]
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>


This thread: