Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She inherited Native American DNA that we know for a fact and she claims it is known within the family that her grandmother from Oklahoma was part Native American.
We don't know that for a fact. She does not have enough DNA match to Amerindian. And it is not known anything about her grandmother having Indian ancestry.
We don't know that for a fact. She does not have enough DNA match to Amerindian. And it is not known anything about her grandmother having Indian ancestry.
Yes we do LOL a renowned geneticist has verified it. Do your homework. You cling to this percentage argument because you don't understand what you're talking about it's hilarious. The family claims the grandmother was part NA and we know that Warren inherited one 13.4cM segment as well as some smaller one's. You're embarrassing yourself.
Are you sure about that? She ran on it against Scott Brown. I provided that link earlier to the video. She doesn't come right out and say it, (something the left does a lot - never answers directly), but heavily implies (which is what the left does do a lot because they know that people make assumptions on implications).
We have seen this for a very long time - the left knows exactly what it's doing when implying a statement without ever saying the exact words - that way they can fool some of the people, and if called on it later, claim that they never said that. This is not a new strategy. It's manipulation. It's beginner's manipulation tactics, but apparently that's all the left needs to fool their own.
As for her lying, yes, she blatantly lied. Some story about being Cherokee does not give her the right to label herself as a minority. You have to have proof, especially if you're claiming NDN status, that you're a minority. The only thing she's ever claimed is Cherokee, therefore, when labeling herself a minority, with only a story to go on, she lied. Flat. Out. Lied.
Don't I take my family's word for it? No. I don't. I was told we have Choctaw. I did not take their word for it, I started researching ancestry to find out if we did or not. Further, I also did not claim to be Choctaw, never claimed to be a minority, never claimed to be a person of color, never asked for any special privileges, do not go around telling everyone that I'm Choctaw because someone in my family said so - because even if I had 50% Native blood, I haven't lived their life. I have not lived their culture. I have not lived their heritage. I never suffered. The majority of my family never suffered. It would be one person who did, not the rest of us, and there's no way in hell I would have the audacity to try to take advantage of that by calling myself a minority on lawyer register - which the only reason to do that is for personal gain.
And unless you had a family member that signed up when the Dawes rolls were open you cannot get a CDIB card from the BIA to be a member of the Choctaw tribe.
Yes we do LOL a renowned geneticist has verified it. Do your homework. You cling to this percentage argument because you don't understand what you're talking about it's hilarious. The family claims the grandmother was part NA and we know that Warren inherited one 13.4cM segment as well as some smaller one's. You're embarrassing yourself.
That DNA matching segment can not be verified as absolutely inherited from a American indian as it's not exclusive to them.
That DNA matching segment can not be verified as absolutely inherited from a American indian as it's not exclusive to them.
The verbiage is highly likely as I told you already science doesn't use the term absolutely that is a term for ideology and religion.
A geneticist can determine if a 13.4cM segment is highly likely of Amerindian origin and he has. A block of 13.4cM contains a lot of blocks of SNP's(single nucleotide ployphisms). There were enough biological markers for him to arrive at his conclusion.
I'm guessing you've gleamed something you read and are parroting it just to have something to support your position.
The verbiage is highly likely as I told you already science doesn't use the term absolutely that is a term for ideology and religion.
A geneticist can determine if a 13.4cM segment is highly likely of Amerindian origin and he has.
Not really because such a small matching segment isn't all that uncommon in a European who does not have American Indian ancestry. There's no real determination of the source or the age. It's just one possible guess.
The verbiage is highly likely as I told you already science doesn't use the term absolutely that is a term for ideology and religion.
A geneticist can determine if a 13.4cM segment is highly likely of Amerindian origin and he has.
The key there is AMERINDIAN. He matched her to Mexican, Peruvian, and Colombian DNA (AmerIndian.) Even that match was so small it was almost non-existent.
Her family tree was traced as far back as 1824 and they found only people who identified as white. She did have one ancestor who was born in "Indian Territory" which means it was not a State at the time. I would suspect that is where her family's confusion is from. As I said before, my maternal grandfather told everyone Winston Churchill was his 3rd cousin. When I actually traced the family tree back, the connection was in the 16th century. Family heritage is sometimes a bit fuzzy when handed-down the generations.
These days we have the Internet databases and DNA to test things. All evidence thus far shows that Elizabeth Warren has no family tree Native Americans in it AND she has between .098% and 1.6% Mexican, Peruvian, or Colombian DNA. The average European-American has .18% of that same DNA.
Elizabeth is no more Native American than I and shares just about as much of Winston Churchill's DNA as I do.
Pocahontas has far less NA blood in her than the average white american but she claimed to be NA to get jobs that should have gone to real minorities....shameful but then she's a Democrat, so, she has no shame.
Not really because such a small matching segment isn't all that uncommon in a European who does not have American Indian ancestry. There's no real determination of the source or the age. It's just one possible guess.
Europeans without Amerindian admixture don't carry 13.4cM segment shared with Native Americans unless the Native Americans have recent European ancestry. Your scenario is plausible with much smaller segments though a 13.4cM segment isn't a small segment. It is possible to determine if the segment has origins in Europe vs the Americas. This really isn't that complicated it is hard though to separate for example the Scottish from the Northern English.
The Cherokee Tribe has formally stated that they don't accept her claim as being one of them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.