"GPS" DNA locating villages of ancestors. Hogwash.

[Mudgeeclarke]

This new "product" (not from FTDNA) seems to be a total sham to capture money from unsuspecting, keen, genealogist/family historians. Apparently, it is "snake oil" promoted by scientists who should know better, and who should not be using the cover of published papers and university positions.

Although the gullible press and TV are reporting on it in glowing terms - as if being better than the invention of sliced bread - before anyone spends $50 to discover their village is in the middle of the Atlantic for example, I suggest reading some critical and detailed commentary from people who should know, rather than reporters who read from a press release.

For a start .... See http://cruwys.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05...ith-dodgy.html.

Debbie Kennett is well known in this field, published, and active. Worth your five minutes. And it will potentially save you, or someone you advise, some hard earned money. :-)

Colin Clarke
R-Z57 | U3b2a

[CNT]

Read the two blog posts and the comments that follow in each post:

http://dienekes.blogspot.gr/2014/05/the-geographic-position-structure-gps.html

http://dienekes.blogspot.gr/2014/04/nature-communications-genographic.html

Dienekes : @Eran Elhaik

Your paper uses at least two ideas that were first published by me: converting unsupervised ADMIXTURE ones into supervised ones via "zombies"; testing a population's similarity to a reference panel by calculating Euclidean distance over the space of admixture coefficients and finding the closest matching population.

Prior work should be cited when it presents a method that is used in the current work. For example, you cite ADMIXTURE which is a component in your current work. You should have done the same for the ideas used in your paper that were previously published by myself.

You can argue independent invention, but this is hard to believe given the timeline, the known readership of my blog, and the fact that my ideas have spread beyond it and have been used by other genome bloggers and third party tools have been developed around them.

In any case, even if you came up with these concepts independently, it is still proper form to cite prior work that is relevant (which this clearly is). And, if you really "were informed of your work only at the reviewer stage and acknowledgment was not allowed", then you can always write a letter to the editor acknowledging the prior publication of part of your method.

[CNT]

http://forward.com/articles/175912/jews-a-race-genetic-theory-comes-under-fierce-atta/?p=all

Some more information about : Eran Elhaik

[Mudgeeclarke]

R-Z57 | U3b2a.

Read the two blog posts and the comments that follow in each post: ..... ...... ]

Thanks for the links.

I am not a scientist, nor qualified in any way to argue the pros and cons at the intellectual levels of any of the parties. But I did get a reasonable dose of commonsense. I don't see how the organization involved can, in good conscience, offer these various levels of results, pinpointing villages etc. This is a free marketplace, of course, and all of us can spend our money how we wish. My opinion, however, is inclined to the view : caveat emptor ...let the buyer beware.

BTW, you can go here to see what is offered, and the money you will be required to offer up for the answer (several upgrades offered) http://www.prosapiagenetics.com/prices.php

(If you do try it out and find your roots are from a village in the middle of the Mediterranean, don't despair - it could be Atlantis. And the seven decimal points of Latitude and Longitude as shown in the example, will locate you to about the door latch at the dwelling. Yessir!)

[Petra]

Here is another thread concerning the company, which offers that GPS-test: http://forums.familytreedna.com/show...light=Prosapia

[Mudgeeclarke]

Here is another thread concerning the company, which offers that GPS-test: http://forums.familytreedna.com/show...light=Prosapia

Thank you.

Junk science !

"All that glitters is not gold".

[Zaru]

Semantics and junk science.

Thank you.

Junk science !

"All that glitters is not gold".

The results that have been reported here are not entirely inconsistent with the genealogies of these people. They do not guarantee or claim that they will pinpoint exactly where a specific lineage of your family comes from, only that they will show where "your family's ancestral village" is. There is a difference, and a pretty crappy one that might help them in an ensuing legal battles.

I tried to upload yesterday, fully knowing what I was involving myself with, and thankfully it was not accepting my raw files from FTDNA.

[Mudgeeclarke]

.... They do not guarantee or claim that they will pinpoint exactly where a specific lineage of your family comes from, only that they will show where "your family's ancestral village" is. ....

Their example webpage shows seven decimal places of latitude. If I recall correctly, a degree of latitude is 69 miles. I'll let you figure out what seven decimal places reduces that 69 miles to, as a pinpoint. .

Even allowing the benefit of doubt regarding the scientific value, motives and usefulness of the program, it certainly smacks of an idea brought to market far too quickly, with website glitches, spelling errors, and sloppy grammar.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ...

[MisterAcoustic]

Here's a link to some real information on this:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140429/ncomms4513/full/ncomms4513.html

Enjoy.

[Mudgeeclarke]

Here's a link to some real information on this:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140429/ncomms4513/full/ncomms4513.html

Enjoy.

Thanks for the link. I'd already seen and read this paper, in the various critical peer reviews, some of which noted - amongst other things - the lack of acknowledgement given to scientists and others who had already been producing population data and had "published" methodology and results.

When you have your own results for the $100 test, it would be great if you could show us here. It seems you will know to within 30 feet, the location of your ancient ancestors. This will be quite amazing - given that my live GPS SATNAV automobile unit using current updates and satellite guidance cannot get me closer than about 100 feet, most of the time.

[Mike_]

Here's a link to some real information on this:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140429/ncomms4513/full/ncomms4513.html

Enjoy.

Thanks for the link.

The 2 most useful things I got from it were that...

1) I shouldn't bother using it as I'm from UK

"...Because GPS best localizes individuals surrounded by M genetically related populations, populations from island nations (for example, Japan and United Kingdom) or populations whose most related populations were under-represented in our reference population data set (for example, Peru and Russia) were most poorly predicted."

2) GPS doesn't stand for Global Positioning System. It's Geographic Population Structure

[keigh]

I've been reading about this test and just kept thinking about which one of my ancestral villages would it locate or can it do a multiple pin point map of Europe.

Sounds fishy to me and I'd probably end up in the North Sea, too.