Posted on 01/29/2010 8:00:09 AM PST by Dallas
LOL - I actually thought about that. Maybe saying I’m doing family research or something but I doubt that would fly.
Why does ‘wood shed’ come to mind?
“To be a genealogist, one must do genealogy. So what were we supposed expect of the genealogists involved in this exercise?”
So that’s all geneologist do is sit around trying to figure out who’s related to Obama?
Leni
Almost, but not quite. They also could share mtDNA, if both descend in an unbroken female-to-female line from a common 9th-great-grandmother.
Moreover, total genome "sample scans" sold by the firms 23andMe and deCODEme now are sometimes able to pick up shared DNA as far as eight generations back, no matter that the ancestral trails involved are mixed between males and females. For example, my own 23andMe DNA results show a "haploblock in common" with a known sixth cousin -- whose paper trail back to our common 5th-great-grandfather passes thru several female ancestors.
Now to be sure, these total genome scans (based BTW on the Illumina chip technology) aren't yet as reliable for genealogy as are the standard Y-chromosome and mtDNA tests. But when the cost of total genome sequencing -- as opposed to today's "sampling" -- falls down to ca. $100.00 per shot, then we might be able to do reliable DNA tracing back to the generation of our 9th-great-grandparents. I guess we'll just have to be patient for another five or ten years!
That’s where the money is—having people pay you to prove that they are NOT related to the Dear Leader.
I attended a family reunion several years ago where I was struck by the resemblance among many of the cousins who may have been fourth, fifth or sixth cousin (last common ancestor was in the 18th century), and living in widely separated areas so not likely to have common ancestry on other lines.
I attended a family reunion several years ago where I was struck by the resemblance among many of the cousins who may have been fourth, fifth or sixth cousin (last common ancestor was in the 18th century), and living in widely separated areas so not likely to have common ancestry on other lines.
If you go back far enough, we’re ALL related.
ROFL!!!!!
Yes, I'm feeling quite nasty today and probably should not post this... but ... what the hay!
Not 100%, but very good. The reasons are simple:
Each generation back doubles the pool of available ancestors while shrinking the pool of available people.
The chances for commonality likewise increase.
These chances dramatically increase before about 1670 not only because one pool (available ancestors) is still doubling every generation back and the other pool (available people) is shrinking but because of world events.
Pre 1670, you had select groups of people (Puritans, Dutch, Baptists, plantation slaves, etc.) who were moving to America for very specific reasons and were often already related. Post 1670, you have a massive increase in this pool because the type of people (debtors, petty criminals, Jacobites, Acadians, etc.) as well as the sheer quantity becomes more diverse.
Long story short is that about half my ancestors are pre-1670, inluding some who were here pre-1600 (Natives), so I'm related to Obummer through the same ancestrial line which he shares with Dick Cheney. No brag, just fact.
LMAO
DISSING COUSINS: OBAMA, CHENEY, BUSH RELATED
By HASANI GITTENS
Last Updated: 5:00 AM, October 17, 2007
Posted: 5:00 AM, October 17, 2007
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_KJXdKMwZqBgHPdXXdGWnEP#ixzz0e2xMVb6A
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.