Posted on 02/02/2016 1:35:32 PM PST by jmaroneps37
I am completing my family tree which goes back 39 generations on one branch and 14 on another. I would like to explain to my grandchildren how unique the DNA combination they have is. We have roots to a canonized saint in our bloodline as well as an American Revolutionary War solider and a famous Irish revolutionary hero too. I just need to show the children how small the odds are of duplicating our family tree. Anyone that can help please Freepmail me, Thanks much
It’s really a function of how many cousins interbred.
we all go back to noah...
saved a lot of time and money.
cool.
you are welcome.
The odds duplicating you family tree are ten times more likely than finding Hillary Clinton getting indicted or having sex with Bill Clinton.
You were ok till you got to the sex with Bill Clinton part.
Traced my dad’s line back to London around 1420.
Then in Ireland, they (Catholics I think) blew up the records house in about 1922. Destroyed nearly a thousand years worth of vital records.
Records on the maternal side are generally pretty reliable. For paternity, going back more than 3 or 4 generations, and your statistical probability may be at risk.
Scientists are now admitting even DNA evidence is not as reliable as its proponents have been asserting.
Your statistical chances of being accurate for 39 generations? Probably no better than Prince Harold.
“The answer is 42.”
“So long, and thanks for all the fish.”
The odds of what?
Are you asking how likely it is to be related to some particular famous people?
And what do you mean by "duplicating our family tree"? Of course, except for siblings, everyone's family tree is unique.
One thing I have noticed in looking at my own family tree is that while you might be able to go back quite far in certain lines, there may be no information about the vast majority of one's other ancestors.
One question that is interesting to ask is: Exactly how much DNA do I share with a particular ancestor? In many cases, the answer after only a few generations is: not much. The direct male and female lines do preserve some limited types of DNA.
My cousin did extensive research on our family tree,even traveled to Sweden and Germany.Basically all she found were a bunch of Vikings,Huns and other various barbarians,which explains a lot about our family.
One branch of my family traces back 25 generations to Robert the Bruce. I actually have a chart that was drawn up to show the names of all those generations. As a kid I had heard we descended from a famous Scottish king, but I thought little of it until years later I saw the movie Braveheart and became more interested in factual history.
There is only one degree of uniqueness. Something is either unique or it isn't.
Your question is too ambiguous to really answer. If you mean an exact reproduction of your Y-DNA, mDNA, and/or autosomal DNA, the odds are high. If you mean the odds of having DNA of any kind passed down from a famous person, the chances are often 100 percent of being related. Almost any person who is a descendant of one of the Massachusetts Bay Colony settlers is also a descendant of King William the Conqueror, Duke of Normandy, and/or his father, along with a long list of Scandinavian kings, and the Emperor Charlemagne. So, the answer all depends on what you really mean about being related in the DNA.
I did not do the tracing, but I have seen a genealogy that shows me to be 12th generation American. That paternal ancestor entered America in 1616 in a place called Elizabeth City, I think in the Norfolk/ Hampton Roads neighborhood. Twelve generations gets my family back to 1616. I can’t imagine how far back 39 generations would take you. Amazing . . . and interesting!
Uh..
1 in 7 Billion?
I don’t think I have any royal ancestors.
Then you are in luck because Genesis contains Noah’s lineage.
If your bloodline is Eurocentric and can get overseas the churches and other history oriented orgs have amazing records.
If I can determine which wife one of my GGG-grandfathers was born from in Tennessee then I may actually be relate to some famous folks that got drawn and quartered by the English monarchs.
Key is being able to get through the early 1800s/late 1700s. Easiest way to do that is to get back to the 1850 census. Which is the first that listed all members of the household AND where and when they were born. From there you can focus on very specific records in that area.
My family namesake I’ve been able to trace to Virginia (served in the NC militia during the rev war). Have his pension application - denied by DC- seems we didn’t treat vets any better then than now. Unfortunately while I know his mothers name I don’t know his father’s so I’ve been at an impasse for a few years trying to get one or two steps further back to make the leap.
Considered approaching it from the other side, but Reed has a wide range of area in lower Scotland and upper England that makes it difficult to find a focal point.
I think that you have misconceived the issue, which is a common problem with questions of probability. Tracing family lineage back for generations enriches one’s appreciation of family heritage, but it but does not add to individual uniqueness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.