DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2008-10 > 1222890514


From: Jeff Scism <>
Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] Questions ??
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:48:34 -0700
References: <100120081244.22783.48E370C7000D2C4F000058FF22073007930A049D0A0304@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <100120081244.22783.48E370C7000D2C4F000058FF22073007930A049D0A0304@comcast.net>


Gee Linda, lighten up a little, who says I have a "campaign"? There is
no such thing as a Non-paternal event, SOMEONE is the father. Someone
did the dirty deed. That event was one of paternity.

It is just hard to determine who, in some cases. So the closest thing to
accurately describing what is likely is a "non-marital genetic
incursion" into a family line, of course this breaks the surname/genetic
commonality of a line.

And yes I have one in my family I have solved WITH dna testing.

Y-chromosome testing placed my father's father's line in R1b1c7 (old
term) and family lore named him McCann or McCain, placed him in a
specific locale, in a particular job, and the rest is now solved.

We will have to be satisfied with motive, opportunity, and
circumstantial evidence. There are no same line/surname male descendants
to test.


Jeff

wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
>
>> I think the term "non-paternal event" is misleading, I think it should
>> be more accurate in describing what is meant.
>>
>
>
>> ?How about "Extra-genealogical event" denoting an occurrence from
>> outside normal genealogy? Or a "paternal lineage incursion"?
>> "Undocumented paternal event" (Gee should we sent them all back?)?
>>
>
>
>> Seriously we need a better lexicon
>>
>
> Seriously, you need to take your campaign somewhere where people who make these decisions congregate! Talking about this here is a waste of time as it will have no impact. The people who write the books will continue to use their preferred terminology.
>
> Though frankly your ideas seem worse than NPE <grin>. NPEs are neither normal or abnormal genealogy. They are biology and there is nothing abnormal about them as they produce children the same old fashioned way. Actually NO paternal events are documented. Births often are these days and the births of English royality at least were witnessed in the past. But so far as I have heard, the act of fathering a child usually is a rather private affair. Even when filmed secretly, there is no evidence that a child was actually fathered but only that a child could have been. It's fairly obvious when a woman mothers a child but not when one is fathered. Fatherhood, despite the efforts of societies all over the planet, remains an ephemeral occurrence that is difficult to prove outside of the lab.
>
> Good luck with your campaign.
>
> Linda Merle
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>


--

Jeffery G. Scism, IBSSG



"In the next place, the state governments are, by the very theory
of the constitution, essential constituent parts of the general
government. They can exist without the latter, but the latter
cannot exist without them."

-- Joseph Story (Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833)

Reference: Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 191.

This thread: