[tcuoohjohn]

well...I think on the basis of the preponderance of the evidence ( The historical standard) it is fairly clear that Jefferson fathered one of more children by Sally Hemmings.

I am sure that there are last ditchers who, for emotional reasons, feel compelled to deny that. I see no slander against Jefferson in that reasonable assertion. He was man of his times and of his class. The phenomenon of interracial progeny in was, if not common, then frequent enough for commentators of the day to note it.

I guess they can find some strained method to question the DNA evidence or come up with a very convoluted and tortured explanation for it. But is you put Occam's Razor to the question it isn't all that complex.

If fully expect somebody to come up with an odd explanation of the Strom Thurmond issue by claiming that it wasn't Strom but his long dead third cousin from Aiken who happened to visit the family within the month that Miss Butler was impregnated in 1925 etc...etc.

[elbucko]

The phenomenon of interracial progeny in was, if not common, then frequent enough for commentators of the day to note it.

Why constrain the phenomenon to times past. Why, even now, I'd rather be the bastard son of Jefferson and Hemmings, than the legitimate offspring of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

[centurion316]

well...I think on the basis of the preponderance of the evidence ( The historical standard) it is fairly clear that Jefferson fathered one of more children by Sally Hemmings.

Given the manner in which this issue has been handled by the press, your position is perfectly reasonable. But, the point of this article as well as the report of the Blue Ribbon Commission has been to put forward the view that this conclusion does not meet the generally accepted historical standard.

This effort represents historical activism and should be rejected by the academic community. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to occur. Things of this sort have been all to common among the historical academy, in fact, this little hoax is mild compared to some of the other more egregious examples.

[lepton]

I guess they can find some strained method to question the DNA evidence

Or have some idea what the DNA evidence actually says: Simply that some male member of the general Jefferson family is an ancestor of at least some of the Hemmings descendants.

Etymology can help you.

[mrustow]

I guess they can find some strained method to question the DNA evidence or come up with a very convoluted and tortured explanation for it. But is you put Occam's Razor to the question it isn't all that complex.

I don't see how Occam's Razor is going to help you to join the Hemings Party. The Hemings Party has adduced no evidence that Thomas was the father; hence, there is no reason to accept the radical, new theory that Thomas was the father. (And you can't call it an old theory, because Callender was merely a libelist.)

It would not destroy Jefferson's legacy, were it true, but the Hemings Party certainly does aim to "libel" Jefferson (legally, you can't libel a dead man). Why they think that would discredit him is a matter of their particular political psychopathology.