GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-12 > 1292259493


From: Mike W <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] NW European R1b from Iberia?
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 10:58:13 -0600
References: <0A965AA0-40C8-44B3-9C79-A9EB11938E05@vizachero.com><201012090942.oB99gNdL003003@mail.rootsweb.com><AANLkTi=71WHCmdKtNxFKt2KbkhLfiHqFFMnHXHVonfCL@mail.gmail.com><00ab01cb9a25$c733a870$c2482dae@Ken1><AANLkTi=6YbjmyDW=gkU-JSbLSGvPPUxEXnGoDEdnYxUu@mail.gmail.com><012601cb9a3f$a2287a50$c2482dae@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <012601cb9a3f$a2287a50$c2482dae@Ken1>


Ken,

Unfortunately, I've been accused of not needing a mask for Halloween.

Let me ask this a different way.

Is there a useful purpose for calculating the TMRCA for the paragroup
of P312* (or subset of P312 or remainder set or whatever we want to
call it) when we can easily add all of the more voluminous known
subclade data (i.e. U152, L21) and get a more complete picture? I'm
fine with an affirmative answer, but what would be the useful
application?

Regards, Mike

---------- Ken Nordtvedt wrote:

I'm just saying you can't allege there is an unusual problem or issue
with P312* TMRCA estimate simply because it is a paragroup.... In
other words: next Halloween I am not going to go to the party wearing
a ydna "paragroup" mask --- it is not particularly scary.

----- Mike W wrote:
.. I did not understand the validity of calculating the TMRCA of P312*
since it is a paragroup rather than a clade.


This thread: