Replies

Genealogy vs DNA two different things. Genealogists do the begats...track ancestry and DNA is a tool to help them do it.

You mean the guys who review census records are different from the guys who analyse DNA? I never would have guessed.

I don't believe Warren's DNA report is not fudged. I believe they found a friend who does DNA tests, then found some random genomes they could claim show Indian heritage, and then did the report. I don't believe she has any Indian background, period. Their family claimed it came from a specific person who would have made her around 1/32nd. The truth is that you can track her geneology and there isn't a single Indian.

Everyone I know who has done Ancestry DNA tests has them coming back with more sub saharan Africa than Warren allegedly has Indian. It's a joke. It's a political effort to make people think we are all African. They can fudge the results any number of ways to find something that they can claim gives you an African ancestor. They could, if they wanted, do the same thing with Indians. They seem to be using Mexican and South American DNA and then find some commonality in those that for all we know comes from the pre-historic European people who came to North America during the last ice age. Then, if you want to be Indian, you can claim to be. 1/1024th, anyway. People I know who are definitely part Indian, maybe 1/8th but had a living ancestor who was Indian, are coming up with bupkis when they get their DNA done. The databases are all screwed up when it comes to American Indian, as you note.

that's ok a lot of us confuse Geneticist and Genealogists.
I was just responding to your post 1843 "Her DNA test with a private geneologist is the equivalent..."

People I know who are definitely part Indian, maybe 1/8th but had a living ancestor who was Indian, are coming up with bupkis when they get their DNA done." " again, tracking ancestry and DNA are 2 different things.

Check it out here...(though I'm pretty sure DNA doesn't track to the tribe level)

https://genetics.thetech.org/ask-a-geneticist/same-parents-different-ancestry

should be interesting to see how the other RAT contenders will handle it, if she runs.

A lot of National Geographic Genographic 2.0 evidence indicates that DNA and people groups have been FAR more mixed from migratory families & people groups than experts ever imagined.

Of course the "originally out of Africa" dogma reigns supreme, still in terms of human origins. However some very ancient bones from China and eastern Europe/balkins (IIRC) is starting to cause some questioning of the out of Africa dogma.

I don't believe Warren's DNA report is not fudged. I believe they found a friend who does DNA tests, then found some random genomes they could claim show Indian heritage, and then did the report.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I totally agree.

The fact they had to find a friendly Dr. Fraud-type academic is virtual PROOF (maybe not in court, but in political reality) that SHE COULD NOT GET THE RESULT SHE WANTED FROM Ancestry or 23 & Me.

“People I know who are definitely part Indian, maybe 1/8th but had a living ancestor who was Indian, are coming up with bupkis when they get their DNA done.”

Could be the scientists do not have a good Indian DNA sample to work with?

There is another reason. They are not related genetically, but I am not suggesting adoption.