[JudyB1938]

I understand that part about MDNA, but I don't understand how NDNA doesn't have to match all markers to be able to be absolutely attributed to a specific individual. To me, it's a "could have". Just like it "could have" identified any one of the others in the "genetically diverse" population group.

Sorry. But I'm not too good when it comes to understanding stuff like that. One time I tried to learn logic, but it wasn't logical.

[dread78645]

To me, it's a "could have". Just like it "could have" identified any one of the others in the "genetically diverse" population group.

There are some 3 billion possible pairs in a complete DNA strand. The estimate is about 80,000 of those make a human being, the rest is useless baggage left over from evolution (and no, I'm not gonnin get into the C vs. E flamage).

Current thinking is 20,000 - 30,000 of the pairs make a unique individual. The remainder are more or less "generic" -- how to make liver cells, bone cells, skin cells, red blood cells, etc.

So an identity match looks at the group of pairs that relates to an individual :

male - female ?, hair color, eye color, blood type, alcohol ametabolic, sickle cell , drop earlobe, etc ...

So far 25 markers (pair sequences) have been proven to be unique to an individual and accepted in court.

So if you can match "female, black hair, O negative, brown eye, no drop earlobe" -- you now have 5 of the 25 markers; and a very good ID of a body.

If you the come up with another 7 or 8 (12-13 total) that's just about ironclad.