Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

batch 118

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by floydowsley
    The DNA of the descendants of the three brothers of John Owsley I (1734-1764) all matched each other. John Owsley I and his three brothers were sons of Thomas Owsley II (1697-1750). There's plenty of documentation to prove these relationships.

    The DNA of eight descendants of John Owsley I all matched each other perfectly, but did not match with the DNA of the descendants of John's three brothers. (The eight descendants of John Owsley I included seven descendants of his son, John Owsley II, and one descendant of his other son, Robert Owsley "Housley.")

    So a "non-paternity event" definitely occurred with the John Owsley I line, which I am a member. It's very disturbing but true.

    Descendants of John Owsley I are known as the "Tennessee" branch of the Owsley family. It is by far the largest branch of the family.

    By the way, John Owsley I was murdered!

    Family Tree DNA has a forum for Success stories. How about a forum for very unexpected results or non-paternity events?

    The Owsley Surname DNA Project:
    http://owslfl.tripod.com/owsleydna/
    thats confusing
    if you dont have two groups of people from different brothers matching then you dont have his dna and no one know his dna
    i dont care about paperwork you need two or three decedents each from a different brother to prove that they all shar john1 genes


    here is what i mean

    (The eight descendants of John Owsley I included seven descendants of his son, John Owsley II, and one descendant of his other son, Robert Owsley "Housley.")

    if the descendant of his other son, Robert matched any of seven descendants of his son, John Owsley II,

    then thats the line and if you matched them thats trianglization the rest be dammed
    what it sounds like to me is people tring to belong to a line like charles carrolton.i am a carroll every carroll seems to want to be related some bend facts to do it
    but dna doesnt bend facts it doesnt have to be a "non-paternity event" it might be a paperwork error
    dna can prove or disprove paperwork and find assumptions

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by floydowsley
      Kevin,

      Thanks very much for your input and suggestions. I'm thinking there could possibly have been prior marriages for one or both of the parents of John Owsley I. This means a lot more research for the Owsley family!!!

      Good luck on finding your ancestry and thanks again.

      here is what i have found in my dennings most people dont know many dennings as such finding one is rare right? ans no

      a women wrote the clerk of chelsea ma for the birth cert of a james denning born 1878 to 1883. the clerk wrote back which one i have 7
      7 james dennings not counting the other birth names in those years

      i have found 2500 other denning people in chelsea so jumping on the firrst james denning 1880 would be a mistake
      how many dennings do you know?



      these people came to place cause family and friends lived there so you will find people with the same names

      Comment


      • #48
        Jim,

        I don't think it's confusing at all. Direct male descendants of four Owsley brothers were tested. The direct male descendants of three of the brothers all matched each other, while the direct male descendants of one of the brothers didn't match with the other three. The one that didn't match was my line, descendants of John Owsley I.

        Thanks for your input.

        Comment


        • #49
          Anyone get their extended set of markers yet? My pending results are listed as:

          Y-DNA37(Y-DNA13-25 Markers) 10/15/2005 118
          Results from this batch are being delivered. If after 10/15 your results are not in, it means that your sample will need to be re-run.

          Y-DNA37(Y-DNA26-37 Markers) 10/15/2005 118
          Results from this batch are being delivered. If after 10/15 your results are not in, it means that your sample will need to be re-run.


          I hope the date estimates are all that is off, and I don't have to to wait on them retesting to get the rest of my markers.

          Comment


          • #50
            Kevin,

            The Y-DNA 13-25 markers for an Owsley Project member are not back yet either.

            Comment


            • #51
              Well, we're two days past the 10/15 target date. Still no 13-25 or 26-37 results. Still no update to my web page either, telling me if the target date has been pushed back, or if my samples will need to be re-run.

              I'm trying my hardest to be patient. As someone said before, I've lived for 37 years without this information, what's another few days or weeks? Still, if ftdna can't do anything to shorten their testing turnaround, they should be able to at least do something to better communicate a customer's status to them.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Kevin G
                Well, we're two days past the 10/15 target date. Still no 13-25 or 26-37 results. Still no update to my web page either, telling me if the target date has been pushed back, or if my samples will need to be re-run.

                I'm trying my hardest to be patient. As someone said before, I've lived for 37 years without this information, what's another few days or weeks? Still, if ftdna can't do anything to shorten their testing turnaround, they should be able to at least do something to better communicate a customer's status to them.
                YOU SEE THATS WHY THEY PUT THIS HERE
                * The above expected date is a target used by the lab. Actual date may vary by a few days.

                I am getting a steady line of results worry not

                Comment


                • #53
                  Rec'd 13-25 tonight. Unfortunately, no 25 for 25 matches, and only one 24 for 25 match. Looks like I'll have to play the waiting game for more people to get tested. The good news is, it is looking like there are lots of people doing just that.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Kevin G
                    Rec'd 13-25 tonight. Unfortunately, no 25 for 25 matches, and only one 24 for 25 match. Looks like I'll have to play the waiting game for more people to get tested. The good news is, it is looking like there are lots of people doing just that.

                    good luck kevin in matches even once and a while people will get their results and you ll get matches i hope

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      After 6 months of waiting for my wife's HVR-2 result, I finally heard from Bennett Greenspan that they can't find what they have done with it, apologize for the delay, and are sending a new kit. Something about a changeover in software. I just wish it had not taken months and months and repeated inquiries to elicit this admission from them. People make mistakes and stuff happens. No one's life is hanging in the balance. But for goodness' sake, it should not take 6 months for them to notice and admit the problem.

                      My uncle's SNP test, also pending now for 6 months, is promised for next week. Jim, you are always the optimist, but as you see, sometimes things really do get screwed up.

                      Paranoid? Paranoid? Who says I'm paranoid??

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I received my 13-25 markers last night as well, I've got 12 25/25 matches. I can't wait until the final 26-37 markers arrive.
                        Seven of the 12 matches have 37 markers submitted so I should be able to narrow it down even more once those are in.

                        Just had to share!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by dentate
                          After 6 months of waiting for my wife's HVR-2 result, I finally heard from Bennett Greenspan that they can't find what they have done with it, apologize for the delay, and are sending a new kit. Something about a changeover in software. I just wish it had not taken months and months and repeated inquiries to elicit this admission from them. People make mistakes and stuff happens. No one's life is hanging in the balance. But for goodness' sake, it should not take 6 months for them to notice and admit the problem.

                          My uncle's SNP test, also pending now for 6 months, is promised for next week. Jim, you are always the optimist, but as you see, sometimes things really do get screwed up.

                          Paranoid? Paranoid? Who says I'm paranoid??

                          LOOK when things got bad for a while people were posting that everyones tests where held up. when i did the math 4500 tests per batchs are being done. it was no where near that many . sorry to say it does happen but not to most.i knew that but no one wanted to hear that.i thought it was still 900 a batch instead it multiplied by 500%. and ftdna changed programs allowing double forums and alot more.
                          again i wish it was smooth but i dont always do the opptimistic stuff this isnt the govt. lets hope houstons of wilma's course

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Received the last of my 37 markers today. Unfortyunately, only 1 4-step mutation. Nothing closer. I'm happy to have my results, but disappointed that they tell me nothing. As I said before, I guess I just have to wait until more people get their tests done.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              118

                              Received my 37 marrker today! 15 Oct due date.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X