Contact Early Possible European Descendants

Random older topics of discussion

Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters

User avatar
clubs_stink
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:43 pm

Post by clubs_stink »

Unlike immigrants of today, it took my family only one generation to leave German behind.

Re the Melungians. I don't pay much attention to the modern infighting and scramblings associated with them. I tend to pay more attention to the written observations of the type such as the journal entry from the mid 1600s that I posted. As for the contemporary conflict of origin, I call attention to the fact that in the early 1600's in new england there were quite a few free blacks who also owned land and conducted business. We have the Lewis and Clark journals that give evidence to the popularity of Clark's? negro manservant among the Indian women of the tribes they visited. At that particular time, it was not uncommon for these couplings, and trouble only arose much later. Many Indians and free blacks fought in the revolutionary war.

The issue among researchers arrives with the use of the word Mulatto, (which was often applied to persons of mixed race, whether AI or negro of whatever mix came out of the couplings)...which did not always mean to all people what it currently means to us.

I am, by certain genetic physical characteristics, considered to be, somehow, of melungeon extraction (I have a rather pronounced "melungeon bump") when in fact we are more than likely slightly "homogenized" Saponi Indians melted down over the generations. My family in particular was listed on censuses as white, they, for the most part "passed" as white, although at this point in time it is impossible to guess as to whether or not this was purposeful, or, if the census takers just wrote down what they percieved, (I see white or light skin, therefore you are white). They also moved from one area where they were known to another in which they were not, thus changing again percetions of "what they were". It was not until after the Civil War that some members of my family tree conjured up a "Black Irish" family (this is noted on civil war pension applications in which the applicant strived to explain his skin color) "black irish" became the new white...as these fellas discovered admitting to have any indian or negro blood would surely get their pension refused. All of the sudden the family geneology aqcuired "black Irish" forefathers...which they knew, was patently untrue....but, it worked. Pensions were acquired :D

Within the course of two generations my family went from white, to black irish...

I am guessing that the community discovered and mentioned in that 1600s journal entry had intermingled with the indiginous population to some degree, and quite possibly with any adventurous negros who may have come into the area, thus mixing up not only blood, but language as well. That sort of intermingling did not have the same stigma that was to overshadow those of mixed blood in the late 1700s to the present.

Currently I suppose my genetic pile of DNA would cause even the most advanced researcher to pause and scratch his head, for he'd likely find Ashkanazi genes, AI genes, and quite a few others that would make him throw his hands in the air. :D
stan
Posts: 924
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:00 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by stan »

that's cool, C-S.
The deeper you go, the higher you fly.
User avatar
clubs_stink
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:43 pm

Post by clubs_stink »

stan wrote:that's cool, C-S.
In light of the way scientists are clinging to the DNA issues to prove or disprove something, it does make me wonder if perchance I decided against cremation and was dug up at some time in the future what they would make of my DNA.

The point is, if my DNA is a confusing pot of melt, why would we automatically assume that the DNA of anyone here in North American (the early occupants) would have DNA that is any more or less "pure" or less confusing than my own.

My point is, that to rely solely on DNA as a scientific proof of anything one way or the other, is foolish. (in one hundred or two hundred years there is not going to be anyone left to explain why I have ashkenazi and AI genes...I might get named a new species... :D )

IN most instances folkelore and rock art might provide more reliable clues than DNA.
User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit »

Well Club, I asked a question here some time ago that no one has offered to answer. About genetic mapping etc, if a group of genes can be swamped by another group of genes, how far can you reliably trace a genetic lineage?
Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Post by Forum Monk »

Digit wrote:Well Club, I asked a question here some time ago that no one has offered to answer. About genetic mapping etc, if a group of genes can be swamped by another group of genes, how far can you reliably trace a genetic lineage?
To mitochondrial "Eve", a 150,000 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve
User avatar
clubs_stink
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:43 pm

Post by clubs_stink »

Digit wrote:Well Club, I asked a question here some time ago that no one has offered to answer. About genetic mapping etc, if a group of genes can be swamped by another group of genes, how far can you reliably trace a genetic lineage?
it would be my contention that you cannot.

DNA is useful for identification purposes when there is a reliable sample to test against

mtDNA is reliable in tracing maternal lineage, it is focused on individual verus race, thus the racial profile may or may not be important.

For instance if my genetic eve was eve #7 and she gave her mtDNA to her daughter who in turn passed it to her son who passed it to his daughter..blah blah blah for generations, I can still be traced to genetic eve #7, but that in no way shows that daughter 1 was light skinned but married a negroid, who's son married an asian and so forth.

I think the genetic studies done on the melungeon's who were apparently only chosen based on their name, was fatally flawed, as are the AI genetic studies that focus only on certain subgroups and ignore others.

In order to get a better idea of the "typical AI gene" (if there is one) they need to design a better set of checks and balances. If my genes are as mixed as many of ours are now, it is because of mass migration and more choice.

Suppose the AI person chosen for a DNA study has a genetic profile that looks more like mine than his neighbor and he is disqualified...that is improper...what it likely means is that his ancestors ran into a rogue group of explorers from WHEREVER and (man+woman=) and rouge genes were introduced into his pool for which there is no current explanation..and this individual is ejected from the gene study.
User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit »

That's my point Monk. Is it reliable if genes can be swamped? Don Johanson used the word 'swamped' to indicate that connections may never be established because of that effect. Is the the line to 'Eve' bullet proof or is there some educated guess work in there?
Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Post by Forum Monk »

Digit wrote:That's my point Monk. Is it reliable if genes can be swamped? Don Johanson used the word 'swamped' to indicate that connections may never be established because of that effect. Is the the line to 'Eve' bullet proof or is there some educated guess work in there?
I am not following this in relation to mtDNA. I haven't found where it is 'swamped'. It is passed from generation to generation and will occasionally mutate. Y-DNA may be swamped. And with regard to race per se, I have said before, there is no gene which determines race. It doesn't exist. Race can not even be defined. As to the 'bullet-proof', nothing is bullet-proof but the mutations occur infrequently enough that the theories and studies seem very compelling. Someone like Cognito is going to have to go into the details. I am barely an amateur geneticist. :(
User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit »

I'm not even that Monk, just curious. I posted Johanson's comments in the HSN DNA topic.
User avatar
clubs_stink
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:43 pm

Post by clubs_stink »

I would be most interested in a mtDNA study of these folks. :D What are there, 7..11 genetic eves out of Africa? I'd love to have the club explain the DNA of these folks to me.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/world ... ref=slogin
User avatar
Cognito
Posts: 1615
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:37 am
Location: Southern California

Human Genetics

Post by Cognito »

I am not following this in relation to mtDNA. I haven't found where it is 'swamped'. It is passed from generation to generation and will occasionally mutate. Y-DNA may be swamped. And with regard to race per se, I have said before, there is no gene which determines race. It doesn't exist. Race can not even be defined. As to the 'bullet-proof', nothing is bullet-proof but the mutations occur infrequently enough that the theories and studies seem very compelling. Someone like Cognito is going to have to go into the details. I am barely an amateur geneticist.
FM, I just returned from a weekend of futbol (soccer to you yanks) and have been reading some threads. What, specifically, is the question? 8)
Natural selection favors the paranoid
Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Post by Forum Monk »

Digit wrote:That's my point Monk. Is it reliable if genes can be swamped? Don Johanson used the word 'swamped' to indicate that connections may never be established because of that effect. Is the the line to 'Eve' bullet proof or is there some educated guess work in there?
As seen from the quote above, we were discussing mitochondrial DNA and I guess the question was asked if DNA can be swamped how reliable can it be as a method of identifying groups. I thought mtDNA could not be swamped, but thought it better if someone who is recognised as an expert explain it better. I think they are confusing normal Y-DNA commonly used for genealogical family studies.
Last edited by Forum Monk on Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit »

I think you're right about my confusion Monk, perhaps we'll get some clarification later.
User avatar
clubs_stink
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:43 pm

Post by clubs_stink »

Forum Monk wrote:
Digit wrote:That's my point Monk. Is it reliable if genes can be swamped? Don Johanson used the word 'swamped' to indicate that connections may never be established because of that effect. Is the the line to 'Eve' bullet proof or is there some educated guess work in there?
As seen from the quote above, we were discussing mitochondrial DNA and I guess the question was asked if DNA can be swamped how reliable can it be as a method of identifying groups. I thought mtDNA could not be swamped, but thought it better if someone who is recognised as an expert explain it better. I think they are confusing normal Y-DNA commonly used for genealogical family studies.
I don't know if mtDNA can be swamped, but I am not certain how reliable it is for determining race. I'd have to get my buddy (who is a microbiologist PhD type) to talk slow for me..and explain it.

I did see some "digging for the truth" show in which the fellow was investigating the grail myth. He managed to secure some bone from the only named, body in the known Merovingian tomb. (by a ring on the body...as if it was evidence, it could have belonged to a beloved relative for all we know but for the purpose of the show they decided the ring belonged to the body in question.) The body was identified as a Merovingian Queen Aragund, they took her bone and extracted some small amount of DNA and compared that to the middle eastern group that Mary Magdalene MIGHT have or is SUPPOSED to have come from. Of course the DNA did not have any middle eastern markers.

The test was fundamentally flawed on several points, the tomb was not inscribed, they identified the body based only on the ring with the name Aragund on the body. Secondly she married Clothidle II...(sorry cannot remember to spell) and there is no oral tradition that details exactly where the Grail bloodline is supposed to have entered into the Merovingian line, thus it is not possible to state that the bloodline began with CLothidle and or his father, or it came in via Aragund. Thus only the children of Aragund and Clothilde or Clothilde himself could be considered viable testing subjects, NOT TO MENTION the lack of control DNA. It's one thing to say that MM was a Jew, but hell I've seen just as much written about Jesus having been a roman..(believe it or not)

I like a good mystery, and the grail myth certainly is that, but unless the ground gives up it's secrets in certain areas of France, that's not a mystery that is likely ever going to be solved, and certainly not with the DNA type testing they've done at this stage.

I will say this in defense of the myth I was dumbstruck by the artwork. Dumbstruck. (and I do NOT mean the last supper.)
marduk

Post by marduk »

you don't really believe that a jewish peasant went to france and ended up marrying royalty do you
:lol:
Locked