Re: DNA at Ancestry
- From: "Don Moody" <dpmoody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 09:57:22 +0100
"John Cartmell" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
In article <KvCdnblTIKbRy-XbnZ2dnUVZ8qeknZ2d@xxxxxx>,
Don Moody <dpmoody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Typical Americanised overclaiming and drivel on what cannot be
delivered. If any first year biochemist, lawyer or logician
take this tripe to pieces in a 30 minute examination answer, they
should never get into the second year at any respectable uni.
I hope you noticed that the claims I made for DNA testing (some
were made with two feet firmly on the ground! ;-)
I did not say or imply that your feet were not firmly on the ground.
We'll see what Ancestry comes up with in reality.
There is no demonstrable reality. The whole thing is a con to obtain
money by false pretences.
To pick just one obvious example, the alleged procedure cannot
possibly differentiate between which of two identical twins is a male
ancestor. Legally, the twin born first is the oldest and inherits
titles and suchlike things. It follows that no amount of DNA testing
will establish whether one is the son of the older brother and thus
gets the goodies or the son of the younger brother and doesn't get
For a second example, there is and can be NO proof that a family tree
submitted to Ancestry is a statement of truth. It follows that no
deductions based on that suspect information can ever be held proven
For a third example known to everybody in genealogy, there are
transcription errors in records, and NO way of proving that there are
no errors in any given subset of records.
For a fourth example, it has been shown time and again that informants
lie when it is to their benefit and the recorder cannot detect the lie
from independent nformation.
And a fifth example is that millions of people not only do not know
but cannot know their alleged paentage because there are no reords of
it at all. There are foundlings, tribes without writing, adoptees who
have no idea they were adopted, and the inevitable by-products of
whoring, to rattle off just a few categories.
So can we cut the Americanised commercial crap designed to exort money
from rich idiots by false pretences, and get back to the realities of
what can be found out with some degree of confidence by painstaking
hard work and proper application of logic to inherently unreliable
There is no magic answer and anybody who suggests there is in exchange
for money is a fraudster.
- Re: DNA at Ancestry
- From: Martin Brown
- Re: DNA at Ancestry
- Prev by Date: Re: DNA at Ancestry
- Next by Date: Cause of death
- Previous by thread: Re: DNA at Ancestry
- Next by thread: Re: DNA at Ancestry