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.
Since Elizabeth Warren thinks she is an Indian, Cory Booker thinks he is Spartacus and Richard Blumenthal believes he is a war veteran, I say we should dress them all up and let them tour America as a new version of The Village People.
Hahahahaha!!!! This could win best group costume at this year's Halloween party!!!
She could have no Cherokee DNA, or she could have a full blooded great grandparent who was a Cherokee and it wouldn't show up in a DNA test because there are no representative samples from many Native American tribes to establish the presence of specific NA DNA.
DNA testing results in both false positives and false negatives regarding Native American ancestry.
It is a proven fact that many who have a documented Native American ancestry show no evidence of that ancestry through DNA testing. It's also a proven fact that some people with no documented Native American ancestry show such ancestry through DNA testing.
You can read Brett Shelton and Jonathan Marks who are preeminent scholars on genetics to get the bad news.
There are two ways to potentially accurately identify Native American ancestry. Because of the unique way Y-DNA is passed from father to son, and the unique way mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to daughter, a special Y-DNA or mt-DNA test may show a link to Native American ancestry through haplogroup identification. Only males can take a Y-DNA test, and only females can take an mt-DNA test.
Autosomal DNA testing only covers 6-8 generations, sometimes 10-12 generations if your family intermarried with 1st and 2nd cousins as many families did for generations.
Y-DNA and mt-DNA shows lineage going back 10s of thousands, possibly even more than 100,000 years.
If your Y-DNA halpogroup is one of the 12 associated with indigenous populations in the Americas, or your mt-DNA haplogroup is one of the 8 associated with indigenous populations, then you quite likely are of Native American ancestry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
As I said earlier, my grandson is 1/8 cherokee as established through Dawes rolls and tribal enrollment by his ancestors. He is not culturally a Native American, nor does he look like one but you can't say that he's not native american because his DNA test didn't establish it. So would he be lying if the claimed that he has Cherokee ancestors?
No, he wouldn't be lying. I have cousins in the same boat.
After his first wife died, my 3rd great-grandfather married a full-blooded Chickasaw woman and had one son.
That son lived on the Chicaksaw Nation reservation and married a full-blooded Chickasaw woman (remember that Oklahoma didn't become a State until 1907). They are both listed on the Dawes Rolls. Two of their sons lived on the Chickasaw Nation reservation and married full-blooded Chickasaw women.
Their grandchildren and great-grandchildren have tested with Ancestry, My Heritage, 23 & Me and FamilyTree, but only one shows Native American ancestry, while the other three do not. Y-DNA testing is of no value here, because it would show Y-Haplogroup J2. Only mt-DNA testing would show a possible Native American related mt-DNA haplogroup.
DNA testing results in both false positives and false negatives regarding Native American ancestry.
It is a proven fact that many who have a documented Native American ancestry show no evidence of that ancestry through DNA testing. It's also a proven fact that some people with no documented Native American ancestry show such ancestry through DNA testing.
You can read Brett Shelton and Jonathan Marks who are preeminent scholars on genetics to get the bad news.
There are two ways to potentially accurately identify Native American ancestry. Because of the unique way Y-DNA is passed from father to son, and the unique way mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to daughter, a special Y-DNA or mt-DNA test may show a link to Native American ancestry through haplogroup identification. Only males can take a Y-DNA test, and only females can take an mt-DNA test.
Autosomal DNA testing only covers 6-8 generations, sometimes 10-12 generations if your family intermarried with 1st and 2nd cousins as many families did for generations.
Y-DNA and mt-DNA shows lineage going back 10s of thousands, possibly even more than 100,000 years.
If your Y-DNA halpogroup is one of the 12 associated with indigenous populations in the Americas, or your mt-DNA haplogroup is one of the 8 associated with indigenous populations, then you quite likely are of Native American ancestry.
No, he wouldn't be lying. I have cousins in the same boat.
After his first wife died, my 3rd great-grandfather married a full-blooded Chickasaw woman and had one son.
That son lived on the Chicaksaw Nation reservation and married a full-blooded Chickasaw woman (remember that Oklahoma didn't become a State until 1907). They are both listed on the Dawes Rolls. Two of their sons lived on the Chickasaw Nation reservation and married full-blooded Chickasaw women.
Their grandchildren and great-grandchildren have tested with Ancestry, My Heritage, 23 & Me and FamilyTree, but only one shows Native American ancestry, while the other three do not. Y-DNA testing is of no value here, because it would show Y-Haplogroup J2. Only mt-DNA testing would show a possible Native American related mt-DNA haplogroup.
That's what I think. All Warren's test results show is some short section of autosomal DNA consistent with Indian DNA conveniently from 6-10 generations ago where autosomal DNA isn't very conclusive in determining an ancestor. Without a paper trail to an Indian ancestor to back it up, it's not only insignificant but inconclusive.
I'm kind of surprised that most DNA services wouldn't identify someone 3/4 Indian as having Indian ancestry even by autosomal DNA though.
Said it before and I will again. About half the people I know claim to be part Native American including my own father. Some actually might even believe it too. Those native Americans sure got around....
Warren is less than 1%. That is pretty thin. I honestly don't care that she claims to be a redman deep inside. I find this whole thing amusing because half the people condemning her no doubt claim they are part Indian. Half the ones defending her make the same claim and all of them are like just as in valid. But hey Warren is a loony fraud and anyone with a lick of common sense knows it. Trump is a snake oil salesman and most know it.
Last edited by boneyard1962; 10-18-2018 at 09:15 PM..
I just find it hilarious at what Trump supporters consider important such as this woman's family background.
Follow that rabbit hole.
Are you honestly saying that the hardliners on the left wouldn't be freaking out if Trump made a claim backed by less than 1% Native American DNA? Be honest ...
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.
