In other words, the 17 marker signature and M222 seem to overlap, but the 17 marker signature the paper examined seems to be a subset of M222. Am I wrong? _______________________________ Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? A: http://five.sentenc.es On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Brian Caulfield <bcaulfield@gmail.com>wrote: > A point of clarification: the 1995 paper by Daniel Bradley's group at the > Smurfit Institute of Genetics "A Y-Chromosome Signature of Hegemony in > Gaelic Ireland <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1380239/>" seeks > only to explain why M222 seems so common among families with origins in > certain parts of the Ireland. Bradley and his group weren't trying to find > the origins of M222, and the paper didn't assert that the genetic signature > it examined is exclusive to Ireland or the Irish. I think we're complicating > things more than necessary if we criticize Bradley, and those who follow his > work, for things they do not assert. > _______________________________ > > Q: Why is this email five sentences or less? > A: http://five.sentenc.es > > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Susan Hedeen < > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> All you say is true, but, does any it have anything to do with the >> origins of M222. What we do or do not know regarding Ireland and the >> Irish of many cultures before there were nations all previous to the 5th >> century really has nothing to do with the origin of M222 except in >> answering an emotional question -- which is why is it so important for >> it to have developed in Ireland? >> >> Personally, I don't care where it formed up. If indeed it is Ireland, >> wonderful since that has been declared my genetic Celtic make up -- at >> least at the moment since M222 is presently defined there and my >> immigrant ancestors lived and farmed there previous to hopping the >> pond. Am I going to be upset if it formed up in Scotland, Brittany, >> near the Alps, in Iberia, Turkey, or Cashel, or any of the other places >> where Celtic society migrated in and out of? Absolutely not. >> >> The current popular theory seems to be short, yet is highly popular >> and considered as fact when indeed it is yet simply a theory based on >> statistical data which was quantified too soon in the game. I think >> that is all John and Bill and several others are saying, and I >> personally thought that previous to joining this group, and I will >> continue to believe it until the theory is really tested right along >> with others with a larger and more diverse testing pool. >> >> Susan >> >> On 8/19/2011 4:51 PM, Bernard Morgan wrote: >> > > >> > > I believe in the entire Nial saga ignored migrations aspect >> completely. >> > > Someone had an emotional need to link the heroes, lore and legend. >> That >> > > is my personal opinion, and I'll admit that I am no geneticist, >> either; >> > > so that remark simply is an opinion, I will acquiesce to being ill >> > > informed if anyone can conclusively prove me wrong. >> > > >> > >> > Surely migration is an aspect, however I think reference to the Nial >> > Saga (name of an actual Norse saga) ignores the written tradition of >> > Ireland that began in the 5th century. In Ireland we are dealing with >> > the third oldest written history in Europe. Hence the movement of the >> > people of claim descent from Neill is well document and publish in >> > numerous academic works, such as Prof. Brynes "Irish Kings and High >> > kings". Writers like Beresford point out the vast majority of Irish >> > manuscripts remain un-translated and it seem un-transcribed. >> > >> > >> >> R1b1c7 Research and Links: >> >> http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >