Posted on 10/15/2018 9:08:45 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
The genetics researcher who reviewed Sen. Elizabeth Warren's, D-Mass., DNA in an attempt to counter President Trump's "Pocahontas" jibes compared her samples with those from people in Colombia, Mexico, and Peru rather than Native Americans in the U.S.
Warren's DNA was reviewed at her request by Carlos Bustamante, a Stanford University genetics researcher, who compared it to reference samples and reported that he had found a Native American ancestor "approximately 8 generations" ago.
Bustamante, however, didn't compare Warren's DNA against Native Americans who live in the continental U.S., citing cultural reluctance to submit to DNA tests. Instead, he used recent samples from other countries whose populations presumably share a lineage during human settlement of the Americas about 15,000-25,000 years ago.
Warren's attempt to rebut the long-ridiculed claim, which was accompanied by a slickly produced television ad, appeared to be a move calculated to clear the way for a 2020 presidential bid. But it may backfire by adding confusion and controversy.
Some genealogical researchers point to limitations in both science and social meaning of the test results, which seem unlikely to prevent political attacks that Warren falsely claimed to be an ethnic minority to become a Harvard University professor.
Academic skeptics point out the murky nature of DNA reference samples, and others argue that even if Warren has a native ancestor, that doesn't make her an American Indian in a cultural or political sense, or validate past claims of Cherokee ancestry.
Bustamante used DNA reference samples from the 1000 Genomes Project, an international effort that recorded samples from people around the world. He wrote that the strongest proof of indigenous ancestry could be found along Chromosome 10.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
So, Fauxchauntas is a Mestizo?
Cherokee people!
Cherokee pride!
What?
Wait...
Never mind.
Does Stanford give out degrees in Genetics Fraud? Just asking.
Maybe she feared it would leak if she opted to sit on it. So, she decided to let it out with as positive a spin as she could manage, hoping to get it over with while there is still plenty of time for the sheeple to forget the episode.
But that's where campaign ads come in ...
Human chromosome 10 is almost exclusively syntenic with chimpanzee, gorilla and orangutan chromosomes 10 or macaque and olive baboon chromosomes 9.
Deport her!
Hey that means we can start using her for the Mexican word of the day memes.
So, they went to, what they thought was a sympathetic source for the test, and the source was willing to help but wasn’t able to completely toss their credibility/integrity out the window by lying for Warren. Because Bustamante know’s that under any type of scrutiny/peer review, which is inevitable, that they’d be called out for lying and basically have a career, severely tainted, if not ruined.
How the Dem’s even function is beyond me. She’s considered one of the Superstars and this is what she does? Effin’ Moron.
What’s even sadder is that she’s in positions to propose and write laws, for us, and that the people of Massachusetts are okay with her behavior. Shouldn’t she be getting lambasted for cultural appropriation?
She’s 1/1024th Macaca!
It does not even do that, especially since the DNA that was compared to was not actually from anyone who was actually a native of North America. It is complete and total nonsense.
My sister spent $90 on a DNA test from ancestry.com. Thanks to my grandmothers on both our father's and our mother's side who spent years researching... we have a fairly well documented family history. The DNA test directly contradicted most of what we know about our family history. This could be either the result of an inaccurate test or an inaccurate family history. When researching the accuracy of the ancestry.com test I found that it is known to frequently be almost completely useless. Senator Warren's test which was conducted by a friend and political ally to produce a specific result is most likely less than completely useless and likely to be intentionally misleading.
Not a geneticist....
Statistics manipulation
OK, “First Latina President” then...ole!
Not quite. There's a microscopically small tribe I read about, run by some corrupt old geezer, who for a nominal fee will give you a cheezy-looking certificate of tribal membership. I read about them when Ward Churchill was claiming Native American ancestry, but all he had was the paper he bought from this tribal elder.
“Is this like the Nazi “one drop of blood” laws?”
Even the Nazis were not as racist as the Democrats, that says something!
.
(Yes, there was some sarcasm in the above).
Interesting post. I strongly suspect you are correct.
Good point.
Very good point.
And true. Yep. True.
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.