DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2007-06 > 1182195749


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] Introduction
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 13:42:29 -0600
References: <d3f.bd6d70f.33a83503@aol.com><BAY109-DAV61D4F4417C5C668610166D5130@phx.gbl>


----- Original Message -----
From: "R. C. Mac Donald" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] Introduction


> Cat fight? What are you reading in what Ken and I have written that would
> make you say that? We just disagree about the value of SNP testing.

No, there is a place for SNP tests and there is a waste of SNP tests.
Ironically, my general impression is that those who have negligible need to
test, test, while those with the very unusual haplotypes who could add much
information for themselves and growth of general knowledge by testing, tend
not to test. Strange?

But what got me into this thread was not the above point. A haplotype which
I'd bet and give good odds is R1b was alleged to be H1a because a Ysearch
entry said H1a and "tested". I was just trying to point out that "tested"
in Ysearch doesn't reliably mean anything. So that seemed a poor example
for why one should get SNP tests. Ken


This thread: