Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-01 > 1293985880

From: Vincent Vizachero <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] How old is Y-Chromosome Adam?
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 11:31:20 -0500
References: <><3203DE795D7E4D24B6A24928379E156E@anatoldesktop><><><19954443.178870.1293883908917.JavaMail.www@wwinf2233><004001cba9d5$b0498ed0$c2482dae@Ken1><><005a01cba9dc$a6a96650$c2482dae@Ken1><5E0F95F0B965408DB2815855E6B42C45@lop><><00f901cbaa01$d1a63110$c2482dae@Ken1><><><><><><><>
In-Reply-To: <>

On Jan 2, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Sasson Margaliot wrote:

> Choosing a mix of markers because it leads to results that conform to
> certain assumptions, then saying that the results somehow *confirm*
> these
> assumptions, would be considered "circular reasoning".

It would be. But I don't see anyone doing this.

> Maybe it's slow markers that produce absurdly HIGH estimates?

I wouldn't say "absurdly" high, but we do seem to have arrived at a
consensus that slowest markers probably do produce TMRCA estimates
that are too high. However, the degree of error does not appear to be
nearly as large as that produced by the fastest markers in the time
frame we are talking about (~3,000 generations).


This thread: