Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lichtenstein Cave

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    In the near future it will be even more refined as more Irish people get tested. They will be able to separate the autosomal markers of Ireland and Britain.
    Hopefully it will be possible to distinguish between Island nations, yes.

    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    I have paid for a FF test for my son and it will be interesting to see his results as 25% of his dna comes from one of the small islands of the west Coast.
    While his results will be interesting MyOrigins is limited. As with Family Finder it is limited by the reference populations and algorithms used. Some people will get obscure results.

    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    I think that FTDNA has taken out my Neanderthal and south east Asian SNPs. It is a more accurate autosomal dna picture.
    FTDNA never gave results for Neanderthal and they certainly wouldn't just "take out" Asian SNPs if you had them.

    While you may feel as though MyOrigins fits with what you know/believe about your ancestry, the testing methods are still limited.

    With regard to my previous post:

    Are you stating that since your MyOrigins results have shown up as 98% British Isles (Coastal Islands) and 2% Finland and Northern Siberia (North Circumpolar) that there is no possibility of your branch of R-U106 having any type of association with a Germanic tribe?

    So if "you are not your ancestor" would it make any difference if your branch of U106 came from a Germanic tribe or some Viking association?

    Arran
    Last edited by N21163; 22 June 2014, 06:32 AM.

    Comment


    • #32
      In my case, as I mentioned before, my MyOrigins result is 100% European: 53% Western and Central Europe, 43% British Isles, and 4% Finland and Northern Siberia.

      I really don't think the bulk of my "Western and Central Europe" result comes from Germans. I don't know of any German surnames in my pedigree on either side, although there is one Dutch (Netherlands) line on my father's side that comes via one of my 4th great grandmothers.

      Honestly, I suspect that French ancestry is producing that result. My father is from Louisiana, and there are a number of holes in my pedigree on his side. For example, I have a number of FF matches with people whose common denominator is the French surname Chastain. I cannot yet link up to a Chastain, but I strongly suspect that is a surname in my dad's family tree. I already have one French surname in my dad's pedigree that I know about: Micou, from Nantes.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by N21163 View Post


        FTDNA never gave results for Neanderthal and they certainly wouldn't just "take out" Asian SNPs if you had them.
        If my ancestors came from Africa to south east to Europe then I must have some autosomal dna from those regions.

        U106 men today speak lots of different languages and are found in lots of different cultures. We don't know the language the first U106 man spoke 6000 years ago or what culture he belonged to when he was born.
        It's very difficult to match languages and genetics. When people change their language, their genetics don't change.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by 1798 View Post
          If my ancestors came from Africa to south east to Europe then I must have some autosomal dna from those regions.
          Not necessarily. If that were the case every European would have reports of this in their autosomal DNA. The alogrithms are based on autosomal markers found in reference populations i.e. 98% of your autosomal sample has markers categorised as "Coastal Islands" or British Isles. Prior to this the algorithm defined these markers as "Western European".

          Originally posted by 1798 View Post
          We don't know the language the first U106 man spoke 6000 years ago or what culture he belonged to when he was born.
          Based on information I have read, U106 originating 6000 years ago seems to be an over-estimate.

          Originally posted by 1798 View Post
          U106 men today speak lots of different languages and are found in lots of different cultures....
          It's very difficult to match languages and genetics. When people change their language, their genetics don't change.
          I mentioned nothing about language and genetics.

          Are you stating that since your MyOrigins results have shown up as 98% British Isles (Coastal Islands) and 2% Finland and Northern Siberia (North Circumpolar) that there is no possibility of your branch of R-U106 having any type of association with a Germanic tribe?

          If "you are not your ancestor" would it make any difference if your branch of U106 came from a Germanic tribe or some Viking association?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by N21163 View Post






            If "you are not your ancestor" would it make any difference if your branch of U106 came from a Germanic tribe or some Viking association?
            Not one little bit.I would not feel any less Irish.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by 1798 View Post
              Not one little bit.I would not feel any less Irish.
              That's the right attitude. It's how you should feel.

              Being Irish includes all the groups that have gone into the Irish mix over the millennia, not just the Celts.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                Not one little bit.I would not feel any less Irish.

                Comment

                Working...
                X