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.
I - You
II - Parents
IIII - Grandparents
IIIIIIII - Great-Grandparents
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - Great-Great-Grandparents
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - Great-Great-Great-Grandparents
32 Great-Great-Great-Grandparents
1/32 = 3.125%
Is that right? There was a post a while back where someone said you don't inherit exactly 50% of your DNA from each parent. Not sure about that, but maybe it explains why it's not exactly 3%.
Having done a pyramid of decent...I worked it out one day- that on person after a few hundred years is descended for well over 5000 people...That means if you go back say a thousand years ONE person has the genetic markers contained in well over 50 thousand people---I am just tossing rough figures around but it is amazing. Out of those thousands of ancestors...at least a few traveled all over the planet breeding willy nilly with everybody.
I guess how much you appreciate the DNA information from these companies directly correlates to how much you already know. Since I already know most of my ancestry to the early 1600s - early 1700s in every line except one, I learned nothing new from 23andme.
This technology will continue to improve, though, as more DNA evidence is collected and cataloged. Probably 20 years from now we'll all be much more sure about everything.
I do appreciate the fact that we are all beginning to understand more clearly that we are all related, and the more of us that understand this the better.
Correct but understand when I'm using that term, I'm not including White South Africans. I hope this clears up any confusion you might have. I just have a hard time believing that the OP has Sub-Saharan ancestry on her Italian side of the family, if that is the case. It would most certainly have to come from North Africa. It may not seem like a big deal to you which part of Africa the OP's ancestry come from but I do think the regional aspect is important as well.
I think you are a little confused. Sub-Sahara Africa and North Africa are different regions... so if the OP is confirmed to have Sub-Saharan African ancestry, how on earth would it have come from North Africa?
That is like saying that if someone finds out they have Russian ancestry, it must have come from Germany. It makes no sense. lol
I guess how much you appreciate the DNA information from these companies directly correlates to how much you already know. Since I already know most of my ancestry to the early 1600s - early 1700s in every line except one, I learned nothing new from 23andme.
This technology will continue to improve, though, as more DNA evidence is collected and cataloged. Probably 20 years from now we'll all be much more sure about everything.
I do appreciate the fact that we are all beginning to understand more clearly that we are all related, and the more of us that understand this the better.
Being curious I got a large piece of paper out and did the simple math. I had two parents- that gave me four grand parents....that gave me eight....that gave me 16....that gave me 32...then think of all the children that the 32 had...it's really remarkable - racism would end if they taught this in school...People imagine that ancients who did not have jet travel stayed close to home...There are stories of the Uncle of Christ who would travel to England to check on tin mine concerns....I could see it now- Let's go Jesus.. if we hurry we will be there in 7 months- They walked- hired the odd boat..and walked some more...We in each of us have some genetic trace in us of everybody that ever lived...............In scripture Christ is described also as The Son Of Man..that he was descended from every person that ever lived.
Oleg, is your point that each of us has a genetic trace of everybody that ever lived? I doubt that, but seems we would have a genetic trace of more people than we ever can even imagine. But everybody? Not sure if that would be possible with the lack of travel for so many centuries. Just IMHO.
I guess how much you appreciate the DNA information from these companies directly correlates to how much you already know. Since I already know most of my ancestry to the early 1600s - early 1700s in every line except one, I learned nothing new from 23andme.
This technology will continue to improve, though, as more DNA evidence is collected and cataloged. Probably 20 years from now we'll all be much more sure about everything.
I do appreciate the fact that we are all beginning to understand more clearly that we are all related, and the more of us that understand this the better.
YMMV in that case. I've been doing our family's genealogy for decades. Not only did it help to discover the unknown, it verified (for me anyway) some connections that couldn't be confirmed on paper.
I think you are a little confused. Sub-Sahara Africa and North Africa are different regions... so if the OP is confirmed to have Sub-Saharan African ancestry, how on earth would it have come from North Africa?
That is like saying that if someone finds out they have Russian ancestry, it must have come from Germany. It makes no sense. lol
No, your the one that seems to be confused. I have already explained myself clearly on the subject. No one is confused about the regions of Africa. The OP was shocked that she had Sub-Saharan ancestry. All I suggested was that if her Sub-Saharan ancestry was on her maternal side of the family which is of Italian origin, there is a good chance that her ancestry is actually Moorish instead of Sub-Saharan. I'm not saying that it's impossible for her to have Sub-Saharan ancestry on her Italian side but it would most likely be North African/Arab if it's on that side of the family. Remember that this is a hypothetical suggestion. If her Sub-Saharan ancestry actually came from her father's side of the family then all bets are off. I think the OP can agree with that as well.
No, your the one that seems to be confused. I have already explained myself clearly on the subject. No one is confused about the regions of Africa. The OP was shocked that she had Sub-Saharan ancestry. All I suggested was that if her Sub-Saharan ancestry was on her maternal side of the family which is of Italian origin, there is a good chance that her ancestry is actually Moorish instead of Sub-Saharan. I'm not saying that it's impossible for her to have Sub-Saharan ancestry on her Italian side but it would most likely be North African/Arab if it's on that side of the family. Remember that this is a hypothetical suggestion. If her Sub-Saharan ancestry actually came from her father's side of the family then all bets are off. I think the OP can agree with that as well.
The people referred to as the "Moors" also included those of sub-Saharan African descent.
When it comes to the big picture I see what you mean but I don't want to go to deep into that subject as that can be a thread in itself.
True.
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.
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.
