GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-07 > 1278916380


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Orient Express and our dna hobby
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 02:33:00 -0400
References: <000801cb217b$3cde5990$48692dae@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <000801cb217b$3cde5990$48692dae@Ken1>


Yes, the agreement of two independent lines of evidence is powerful proof, which
is the reason Y-DNA surname projects are so successful. It doesn't take more
than a little common sense to appreciate that a DNA match in the same surname is
unlikely to be mere coincidence.

I do think David Suchet is far and away the best Hercule Poirot. I'm glad he's
back.

Diana

> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Ken Nordtvedt
> Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 12:32 AM
> To:
> Subject: [DNA] Orient Express and our dna hobby
>
> It struck me tonight after watching the latest PBS film
> production of Agatha's "Murder on the Orient Express" that
> there is a moral to that story about the kind of
> probabilistic evidence that is commonly present our dna
> hobby. As soon as Poirot found a connection of every person
> resident in that train coach sleeper car to the American
> family murder tragedy of five years earlier, he had a fact
> which would defy the odds of having happened by chance, so he
> could have immediately concluded that probably everyone was a
> co-conspirator in the murder on the train at the very least.
> That is not rocket science, and Poirot's little grey brain
> cells were not strained in reaching such a conclusion. Some
> of our hobby's conclusions are of a similar nature. That all
> coach passengers actually did directly participate in the
> deed was frosting on the cake.
>

This thread: