DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2010-08 > 1280779650

From: "Sandy Paterson" <>
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Lamont [was How long has M222 been in Scotland?]
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:07:30 +0100
References: <253f3.c874e20.398733e7@aol.com> <000001cb3254$2cb51e20$861f5a60$@com><4C571BA0.6010704@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C571BA0.6010704@aol.com>

Go to


Scroll down to Lamont and have a look.

Or, go to


and have a look there.

But suppose for a moment that there is for some reason a 3rd Lamont site
that I am unaware of and which has 9 R1a haplotypes. Or maybe you are so
familiar with R1a that you can recognise errors in classification that I am
unable to recognise. How does 9 make a majority out of 61?

You say we've compared this data before. I do recall you once posting that
R1a constituted a majority of Lamont haplotypes. I assumed you made a typo
error so I didn't bother commenting. However, when you repeated that
yesterday I thought it appropriate to point out that you are simply wrong.

So I ask you with complete sincerity. Please explain how you make R1a out to
be the majority of Lamont haplotypes?


-----Original Message-----
[mailto:] On Behalf Of John Mclaughlin
Sent: 02 August 2010 20:25
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Lamont [was How long has M222 been in Scotland?]

On 8/2/2010 10:05 AM, Sandy Paterson wrote:
> Let me disabuse you. T

We will definitely get along better if you can control this type of

R1a 3

I wonder how I managed to find 9 R1a samples. We've compared this data

R1b1c7 Research and Links:

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

This thread: