Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are the majority of Americans related?

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

  • #78
    Originally posted by georgian1950 View Post
    Looks like everyone in the list has a connection to MMaddi. Stuff like that does not just happen by chance. I'd say my theory is well on its way to be proven.
    With your parameters everybody with significant part of European ancestry has at least a remote connection to MMaddi, or any other with significant part of European ancestry. The connections are most easily explained as being results of intra-European mixing for thousands of years. Nothing in the data really forces to use only a couple of hundred years old, huge loop via North Carolina to explain why people with European ancestry are interrelated. At least that is what Occam's Razor has to say here.

    Comment


    • #79
      Originally posted by John View Post
      I don't know what surprises me the most, that this pseudo-science is still being presented, or that it is still being debated.
      You took the keystrokes right out of my fingers.

      Funnily enough, I am more closely related to an 8000 year old skeleton (6.9 cm/700 snps) from Luxembourg than I am to this North Carolina 'situation'. I am of course supposedly another descendent of an escapee who made its way to Europe.
      Last edited by suttonwho; 3 May 2015, 06:13 AM.

      Comment


      • #80
        Originally posted by georgian1950 View Post
        The theory has been refined. It is more of a human breeding and trafficking operation where the females were sold as brides and the boys were sold into seaman apprenticeships. We are seeing people with connections popping up all over the world, probably from the sea faring boys being spread around.

        MMaddi, here is a little analysis for you. I thought I'd see how everyone on this thread that has a connection to the North Carolina situation (just about everyone) triangulates with you. We will use as a starting point the "one to one' with my mother (F367106) because see does not have all the other potential common ancestors that I do with you. From your first post on this thread using my 250 SNP's and 1.0 cM minimum segment size matching you (M203724) showed 14 matching segments with her with a total of 38.1 cM for matching segments larger than 1.0 cM. Since two people can match on around 3400 cM, you and my mother only match on a little over one percent of the autosomal segments that we look at. For a single match seven generation back, that is about the right ball park.

        Besides the kits gathered from this thread, I am using two kits, Gatty and 100% Finnish, from this thread;

        http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=37438

        Also I am using a kit from GEDmatch Forums from a person who believes himself to be 100% Sicilian.

        Here are the kits:

        M203724 (MMaddi) 38.1
        8 F (Duffy) 457.2
        5 F (Kern) 423.0
        3 Lady A 146.7
        6 Lady B 387.0
        4 Jean Mauck 441.2
        6 F216781 (Franklin) Marian 464.0
        3 F231811 (Kingcade) 407.0
        5 F195686 (Silly Sally) 438.9
        9 F91757 (McCain) 507.9
        4 F328982 (Crews) 404.4
        6 FN30278 (Fry) 421.5
        5 A515622 (Kenneth Wyatt) 446.6
        7 FB5111 (Nicola Mitchell) 408.0
        3 F381439 (MCarrasco) 426.2
        9 F279298 (Geraldine) Nicola 439.2
        4 A045340 VegasGem 417.8
        7 FN49571 (Tim James Gatty) 466.1
        7 100% Sicilian 345.1
        7 100% Finnish 440.5

        The numbers on the right are the total of matching segments at least 1.0 cM long with my mother. On the left is the
        number of MMaddi and my mothers matching segments which the kit has matching segments with my mother that overlap with MMaddi's.

        Looks like everyone in the list has a connection to MMaddi. Stuff like that does not just happen by chance. I'd say my theory is well on its way to be proven.

        The supporting detail for each segment can be found in the attachments.
        MMadi, looks like the case is closed. Using "250 SNP's and 1.0 cM minimum segment" "everyone in the list has a connection to MMaddi. Stuff like that does not just happen by chance."

        Nevermind phasing, nevermind using 1cM segments, nevermind the concept of IBS, nevermind the glaring fact that everyone tested in this theory is proving to be related at these small segment lengths...you, a person who believes himself to be 100% Sicilian and has the records and I would presume matches to prove it, are incorrect.

        Somehow, it is more plausible that the reason everyone, no matter their known ancestry or where their direct ancestors are from, is a descendent of a group of prolific breeders from North Carolina. Not just colonials or southerners or Americans, but everyone. Somehow, it is inconceivable that humans across the board share relatedness at these levels.



        Georgian, I have already asked you to stop using my grandmothers to further 'prove' your theory.
        Last edited by suttonwho; 3 May 2015, 06:31 AM. Reason: to remove my grandmothers' kit numbers

        Comment


        • #81
          By co-incidence I've noticed 2 of my matches who I match on the same segment of Chr 12 have a common ancestor born 1747 in Anson, North Carolina. It may just be IBS though.

          Comment


          • #82
            Originally posted by georgian1950 View Post

            Looks like everyone in the list has a connection to MMaddi. Stuff like that does not just happen by chance. I'd say my theory is well on its way to be proven.

            The supporting detail for each segment can be found in the attachments.
            Your theory is based on regarding tiny segments as IBD. These segments would not be regarded as a match at all three commercial testing companies - FTDNA, AncestryDNA and 23andMe. I've already asked you to provide a link to a scientific study that proves that such tiny segments with small amounts of matching SNPs are proven as IBD. You haven't done that yet. Until you do, I regard your findings
            as your personal pet theory, which is very suspect.

            In the absence of any scientific study supporting your methodology, I've also asked you to provide some paper trail documentation that proves that someone who escaped from the alleged slave ring came to southern Italy or Sicily and had descendants there. If you could show me this, then I would concede it's possible that some of my Italian ancestors were descended from this alleged North Carolina slave ring. You've not provided that sort of paper trail documentation.

            So, all we have is your unaccepted use of tiny segments as IBD and an implausible, unproven assertion that someone who escaped from this slave ring in North Carolina went to Sicily or southern Italy in the 1700s and is among my ancestors. Maybe you actually believe that you've made a strong case for some connection between you and me through a common ancestor. But I think I'm not the only one who thinks you're trying to make the numbers fit your theory and failing to meet any sort of reasonable standard of proof.

            Comment


            • #83
              Originally posted by 192971 View Post
              With your parameters everybody with significant part of European ancestry has at least a remote connection to MMaddi, or any other with significant part of European ancestry. The connections are most easily explained as being results of intra-European mixing for thousands of years. Nothing in the data really forces to use only a couple of hundred years old, huge loop via North Carolina to explain why people with European ancestry are interrelated. At least that is what Occam's Razor has to say here.
              LOL!! I'm so happy that the OP has introduced me to so many long lost cousins.

              Thanks for summarizing how ludicrous the OP's methodology is.

              Comment


              • #84
                Originally posted by 192971 View Post
                With your parameters everybody with significant part of European ancestry has at least a remote connection to MMaddi, or any other with significant part of European ancestry. The connections are most easily explained as being results of intra-European mixing for thousands of years. Nothing in the data really forces to use only a couple of hundred years old, huge loop via North Carolina to explain why people with European ancestry are interrelated. At least that is what Occam's Razor has to say here.
                You have to be careful whenever you pull out Occam's Razor. You might cut yourself. You are the one saying stuff without proof now. I have a much better case that the whole group shares some common ancestry in 18th Century North Carolina. Everyone is just brushing off the X-DNA matches that cluster in the time-space continuum in the one area of North Carolina during the 18th Century,

                MMahdi does not have an X-DNA connection to my mother. I believe him to have a single line back to North Carolina. It probably has two males in a row, killing off the possibility of an X-DNA match. I think everyone else on the list has an X-DNA connection to my mother. Rather than double-checking that, I decided to do an X 'one to one' between everyone besides MMaddi with Lady B. Lady B is both on my GEDmatch 'one to many' list using default parameters and a Family Finder match. She has known slave ancestry in North Carolina into the Civil War. When I checked, everyone on the list, except MMahdi, has an X-DNA match with Lady B.

                From looking at scores and scores of kits that have common ancestry in this North Carolina situation, I have noticed that those who have around 400.0 cM or more of matching segments with me or my mother (and match on certain segments that are indicative of being connected to specific lines) typically have more than one connection to the human trafficking ring. Another point to consider is that when you do a regular 'one to one' between any two persons on the list that have around 400.0 cM total of matching segments (over 1.0 cM) with my mother, they also match in the same range. Matching in the same range when various pairs are selected to be tested is a strong indication of common ancestry.

                Comment


                • #85
                  Originally posted by georgian1950 View Post
                  From looking at scores and scores of kits that have common ancestry in this North Carolina situation, I have noticed that those who have around 400.0 cM or more of matching segments with me or my mother (and match on certain segments that are indicative of being connected to specific lines) typically have more than one connection to the human trafficking ring. Another point to consider is that when you do a regular 'one to one' between any two persons on the list that have around 400.0 cM total of matching segments (over 1.0 cM) with my mother, they also match in the same range. Matching in the same range when various pairs are selected to be tested is a strong indication of common ancestry.
                  OK, then let us take my distant relative for a reference. Kit F999937, known as "NE1". Her remains were found in Hungary and dated to be about 7200 years old.

                  With your parameters, she matches autosomally your mother. ->

                  Comparing Kit F367106 (Mrs. Barbara Collip Wyatt) and F999937 (NE1, Hungary, 7.2ky)

                  Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 250 SNPs
                  Mismatch-bunching Limit = 125 SNPs
                  Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM

                  Largest segment = 5.3 cM
                  Total of segments > 1 cM = 426.1 cM


                  With your parameters, she is also an X-match for your mother. ->

                  Minimum threshold size to be included in total = 150 SNPs
                  Mismatch-bunching Limit = 75 SNPs
                  Minimum segment cM to be included in total = 1.0 cM

                  Largest segment = 4.4 cM
                  Total of segments > 1 cM = 69.0 cM Actual.


                  Surely she is safe from having ancestors via "this North Carolina situation", but still she seems to fit very well in your "diagnostic" conditions for it. Please explain, georgian1950.

                  Comment


                  • #86
                    Ok, this going back and forth could go on ad nauseum...
                    Do you, or do you not, have any 'proof' (ie: Published Papers, in any scientific journals, etc) aside from your kit by kit comparison, for us to look at as a source to back up your research?
                    Yes
                    or
                    No
                    will do.
                    Thank you.

                    Comment


                    • #87
                      Originally posted by LadyAlaise View Post
                      Ok, this going back and forth could go on ad nauseum...
                      Do you, or do you not, have any 'proof' (ie: Published Papers, in any scientific journals, etc) aside from your kit by kit comparison, for us to look at as a source to back up your research?
                      Yes
                      or
                      No
                      will do.
                      Thank you.
                      I would also accept any paper trail documentation that someone from his theorized North Carolina slave ring escaped and went to Sicily or southern Italy. I could add that this escapee was also one of my Sicilian or southern Italian ancestors, but let's start with documentation on one escapee from NC who ends up in Sicily or southern Italy.

                      I've asked twice for a citation of a scientific paper supporting his use of tiny segments as IBD or paper trail documentation proving the NC-Sicily/southern Italy connection. His silence in response to those requests is deafening.

                      Comment


                      • #88
                        OK, I have to admit this threat started out as potentially a learning tool for me but I now see that any mutated DNA that would be unique to the man named Thomas Edward Green and the other man named Wilson has not been disclosed and also inheritors of this unique DNA have not been disclosed.

                        So while there may of been bride selling and even kidnapping to obtain brides aka dowries in colonial North Carolina as well as kidnapping young men to serve as slave sailors on merchant ships for hundreds of years and long before North Carolina became a colony I have yet to see any historical reference for the claims in these threads that this happened in the North Carolina of 1700.

                        For what it's worth ever single one of my ancestors is old Appalachian meaning they are colonial American dating from the earliest American colonies in Massachusetts but mostly Tidewater Virginia and North Carolina.

                        Surnames are too many to list but include Grogan a Y-DNA line that was actually proven genetically to have contributed to 3 NPEs in North Carolina between 1760 - 1800. However this was after the time of Green and Wilson. I have Shepherd, Napier, Combs, Farley, Day, Yates, Smith, Wilson and so many other surnames that are colonial to Virginia and North Carolina and all my GEDMatch and FTDNA matches range from 2nd - to remote cousins from colonial America.

                        Despite all this colonial interrelatedness and the maternal mtDNA line and the Day paternal line being associated with Amish in Pennsylvania and arranged marriages know to have been made by those sect I have evidence of buying brides.

                        Wilson at 12 is the 2nd most common surname in my FTDNA FF list of common surnames after Smith at 18 but I don't see any proof I descend from a kidnapper and slave seller by the name of Wilson from colonial North Carolina. I don't even have a Wilson in my GEDCOM family tree although I must have Wilson ancestors.

                        So as I see it with a proven exclusively American colonial ancestry and that I have 12 Wilson matches in my FF matches but none in my GEDCOM would seem to be just the type of mysterious ancestry one would expect that you could use to prove your theory correct. But you must identify DNA unique to this Wilson fellow and at least one line of proven, traceable DNA to this Wilson fellow and I must match the proven descendant(s) of this Wilson fellow for your claims to take worth.

                        It's not impossible to prove I descend from a Wilson of circa 1700 North Carolina via autosomal DNA - I, or rather a distant cousin, proved rather easily he was related to me via a John Combs of North Carolina circa 1750 and from there it was easy to figure out he was able to do that because I descend from John Comb's grandfather Mason Combs of Maryland circa 1700 via 3 different lines of descent, of those interrelated cousins, the closest relation being 2nd cousins. The key there was multiple lines of direct descent from Mason Combs to myself.

                        So after spending the better part of a day reviewing and reading about these 1cm - 3cm DNA snippets I am convinced a lot of them will become eventually associated with races, ethnicities and some of them even surnames but I don't see that type of result yet here in Georgia1950's work.

                        Here are my comparison results:

                        Kit F10668/F239841 auto
                        Largest segment = 4.4 cM
                        Total of segments > 1 cM = 437.1 cM

                        Kit F10668/F367106 auto
                        Largest segment = 6.9 cM
                        Total of segments > 1 cM = 436.3 cM

                        Kit F10668/F367106 X
                        Largest segment = 1.0 cM
                        Total of segments > 1 cM = 1.0 cM Actual.

                        In fairness to Georgia the behaviors of his claims have been recorded historically in other places. And I've read that some of the Lumbee or rather some of the predecessor tribes to the people that would later claim to be Lumbees migrated to Canada.

                        I'm supposed to have old Amerindian ancestry and GEDMatch shows that I have from 0.5 - 2% depending on the type matching database and algorithm I choose. I also am said by GEDMatch to have 0.17 - 1.0% sub-Saharan/Nile/Ethiopian DNA.

                        So I have genetic and historical profile to be a candidate that enables Georgia1950 to prove his claims but ii would need a lot of work, at least corroborating DNA evidence with a traced paper trail. Failing that paper trail then a unique mutation, even less than 5cM to this Wilson fellow if I had it and others with Wilson as a surname or high number of Wilson matches from colonial North Carolina and we triangulated our DNA than maybe we are talking...

                        Unless I can identify the short DNA as being unique to certain surnames I consider most of these short segments to be common units of human DNA inheritance that may or may not be associated with race, ethnicity, and familial mutations.
                        Last edited by B52; 4 November 2015, 04:14 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #89
                          Originally posted by B52 View Post
                          In fairness to Georgia the behaviors of his claims have been recorded historically in other places. And I've read that some of the Lumbee or rather some of the predecessor tribes to the people that would later claim to be Lumbees migrated to Canada.

                          I'm supposed to have old Amerindian ancestry and GEDMatch shows that I have from 0.5 - 2% depending on the type matching database and algorithm I choose. I also am said by GEDMatch to have 0.17 - 1.0% sub-Saharan/Nile/Ethiopian DNA.

                          So I have genetic and historical profile to be a candidate that enables Georgia1950 to prove his claims but ii would need a lot of work, at least corroborating DNA evidence with a traced paper trail. Failing that paper trail then a unique mutation, even less than 5cM to this Wilson fellow if I had it and others with Wilson as a surname or high number of Wilson matches from colonial North Carolina and we triangulated our DNA than maybe we are talking...

                          Unless I can identify the short DNA as being unique to certain surnames I consider most of these short segments to be common units of human DNA inheritance that may or may not be associated with race, ethnicity, and familial mutations.
                          B52,

                          A few points. Just about everyone who claims to Lumbee or Melungeon and has a kit to test, shows a link to Mr. Green. Mr. Green has some African and other stuff that comes out of the 17th Century Barbadian melting pot, plus he appears to have some Native American because almost everyone who has him as an ancestor shows at least a small amount of Native American. I have identified certain segments (some of which show up in our match) as being indicative of Mr. Green as an ancestor. I'll be sure to cover such segments in the upcoming round number two. I'll go ahead and give you one - chromosome #5, 129-132 Mbp, comes up in a lot of comparisons.

                          Jack

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X