Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

interest question

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

  • josh w.
    replied
    I did not mean to be overly negative about the state of the research. Like any other human activity science is an imperfect process. Science should be tentative rather than absolute. There is no such thing as a scientific study without flaws in design. Flaws in design, unless they are numerous, do not require that a study be rejected, but rather be treated with some caution. Having said all that, we still have a long way to go in genetic geneology. If Spencer Wells thought we already have a clear picture, he would not have started the Natioal Geographic project.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim Denning
    replied
    Originally posted by layman
    What do you mean with "and they can very well be wrong" ?

    Yes, I know about the ABD, but too many people say it's flawed so I think it's better to wait for the 3.0 version.
    Have any of you undergone this test?


    i am about to start a new thread check it out about people being wrong

    always remember the ebb and flow doctors we sure they were right and did medicine accordingly

    Leave a comment:


  • josh w.
    replied
    Jim can speak for himself, but I think he meant that research is still in its infancy. At least some of the points stated in any of the books have been disputed by others. For example, in my own case one source stated that my haplogroup began near Iraq while another concluded that it was near India. Most of the conclusions in these books should be regarded as theories with some empirical support. A critic would have a field day pointing out flaws in the design of some of the studies. On the other hand, developing some idea of what happened more than 10,000 years ago is an incredible accomplishment.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    What do you mean with "and they can very well be wrong" ?

    Yes, I know about the ABD, but too many people say it's flawed so I think it's better to wait for the 3.0 version.
    Have any of you undergone this test?

    Leave a comment:


  • josh w.
    replied
    layman, if you are interested,"Ancestry by dna" will give you a geographic breakdown by continent and for an additional fee by region of Europe. This includes percentage contributions to your genome by the regions involved.
    Last edited by josh w.; 16 November 2005, 08:14 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jim Denning
    replied
    Originally posted by OldMD
    There is definitely something for you to do - read the experts, rather than try to get all of your information on a Forum!

    Try "The Seven Daughters of Eve, by Bryan Sykes, follow with his "Adam's Curse".

    Then go to "The Journey of Man", by Spencer Wells, and "The Real Eve", by Stephen Oppenheimer.

    When you get brave, try DNA - The Secret of Life", by none other than James D. Watson, of Watson-Crick fame.

    AND THEY CAN VERY WELL BE WRONG

    Leave a comment:


  • josh w.
    replied
    As an OLDPh.D I have discovered that neither age nor degree confers wisdom.

    layman, there is some hope. A new endeavor, HapMap is based on the empirical finding that some autosomal dna does not recombine. In addition the non-recombined dna is inherited in clusters or haplotypes. If this is really the case, it may be possible to trace ancestral lines in autosomes. It will probably take years for this to be available.

    Correction--in an earlier post I mistated that humans differed on 3 million genes. I should have said that they differed on 3 millon base pairs (A,G,C,T) located on around 25,000 genes. To get an idea how little of our inheritance is covered by current tests, the non-recombinant portion of the Y chromosome covers about 25 genes. The mtdna test which amazingly gives a fairly clear picture of our maternal line does not test for our human dna at all. Mitrochondria are essentially bacteria- like organisms living in a symbiotic relationship with our cells. They have"bacterial" genes and chromosomes along with their own mutations and evolutionary history.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    There is definitely something for you to do - read the experts, rather than try to get all of your information on a Forum!

    Try "The Seven Daughters of Eve, by Bryan Sykes, follow with his "Adam's Curse".

    Then go to "The Journey of Man", by Spencer Wells, and "The Real Eve", by Stephen Oppenheimer.

    When you get brave, try DNA - The Secret of Life", by none other than James D. Watson, of Watson-Crick fame.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    So autosomal DNA carries a lot more weight than Y-DNA and mtDNA, is that it?
    Thus being true that the outside lines may not be the dominant ones in someone's genetic makeup.

    Well, since Y-DNA and mtDNA tell so little, and autosomal tests are said to be inaccurate, I think there's nothing left for me to do but to wait for the autosomal to get more precise.

    Leave a comment:


  • dentate
    replied
    Whew. For a moment I thought you were describing Josh W. as a "babe."

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Sorry! That comment became attached to the wrong message.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Wisdom from the mouth of babes!

    Leave a comment:


  • josh w.
    replied
    All your remaining ancestry is reflected in your autosomes and the recombining parts of your sex chromosomes. These chromosomes contain over 99% of your genes. The problem is that there is no way to tell if any of these genes come from one of your paternal lines or one of your maternal lines. The Ydna and mtdna tests thus identify a specific line of descent but only cover two out of the multitude of your ancestors.
    An autosomal test will give you some general information about the geographical path of these ancestral lines.
    Last edited by josh w.; 15 November 2005, 11:02 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Thank you very much, Jason. It really helped.

    Originally posted by Jason
    Neither of these tests will tell you what is "in between" those lines in your family tree. So, it won't tell you about your paternal grandmother's line or your maternal grandfather's line. Those lines might be something totally different.
    But since we only have one Y-DNA haplogroup and one mtDNA haplogroup as you said, can't we say that those in-between lines don't matter? If our Y-dna is defined only by one line, and our mtDNA is also defined by only one line, what do the in-between lines count for?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jason
    replied
    As for the question about Y-DNA and mtDNA as identifying markers, you only have one Y-DNA haplogroup. It tells you the deep ancestry of your father's father's father's father etc. The same is true for mtDNA, which tells you the deep ancestry of your mother's mother's mother's mother etc.

    Neither of these tests will tell you what is "in between" those lines in your family tree. So, it won't tell you about your paternal grandmother's line or your maternal grandfather's line. Those lines might be something totally different.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X