I actually have a question that pertains to some of the other postings; however, I'm going to preface with a couple of remarks. Some of you men are behaving like children in the sand box squabbling over whose match box car is the best, and most of you haven't purchased the cars you are playing with. I review this board for interesting discussion regarding the sub-clave, the various histories some contribute, the discussions of origins, technical data, substantive remarks which very often are informative and educational -- not bashing one another over utilities and models. In regard to the Howard Model, I requested from Mr. Howard to run the M222 groups out of the project which I tested under, and he graciously ran several one of the entire M222 (about 15% of over 750+++ participants) + some others we threw in which are questionable as to whether or not they are truly M222 even though some did SNP positive, but they are so off modal that they are more than ambiguous, and perhaps actually fall into the new sub-clave -- don't know that yet. The phylogenetic tree produced just happened to turn out very close to what the histories surrounding times we would expect for ancestors of these test subjects. Long story which I won't go it to; however it supports a work in progress which began long before I requested Bill's analysis. This is not the only analytical look, either. John Lochlan ran McGee; the Jantzen Utility was Run; I asked Sandy Patterson to do a run; Nordtv. & Harold ASD comparisons were also run. Believe it or not, fellas, all the utilities and models for what they do are supportive of one another. McGee has its shortfalls in that it operates on genetic distance; ASD happens to estimate a bit too short; Patterson & Howard were actually very close together with time lines, and Howard's tree is spectacular. I would suggest strongly to opinionate all you want, but until the rest of you develop your own models and/or utilities and write papers of the findings, play nice in the sand box because for one I am getting sick of it. Now onto my question: Has anyone looked into what the genetic impact on the middle east that of the Europeans impressed into the Roman Army, Europeans during the crusades, and the Celtic settlements in Turkey (the Galatians for you Bible readers) and elsewhere might have had in regard to the recent R1b discussions recently on this list? Susan

Susan, In regards to your question about the Middle East, you need to remember that most of Ireland and Britain were under glaciers just 10,000 years ago or so - like Greenland today. Later much of Europe was re-peopled from Western Asia and elsewhere in 3 or perhaps 4 waves of settlement. The current theory is that each successive wave largely exterminated the previous males lineages. So most Western European Y-DNA lineages are derived from Western Asian ones, from only 4,000 years ago or so. So most people in Ireland and Britain have lineages derived from Western Asian ones, but some individuals have much older ones. In regards to your comments on the debate over the use of SNP's, Bill has not answered the pivotal question of why he included people who are both positive and negative for the M222 SNP in his calculations. He has also brushed aside Busby's paper - which echoed my criticism of his methodology - as it it didn't apply to him or his RCC methodology. Then he further tried to redefine what the acronym SNP actually meant. For the record, it does not refer to a collection of STR values, rather a single point mutation. These are serious issues and he has make no attempt to address them. It's as if he's saying, "Hey folks I have all the answers, and using my RCC can give you the exact date for the TMRCA of M222, accurate to 2-decimal places", then when I question his data and methods, he responds, "OK I can give you the answer correct to 10-decimal places, using the exact same data and methods". He keeps wanting to use his new RCC toy again and again, rather than step back and look at what some of us are saying to him... Cheers, Paul On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Susan Hedeen < chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > I actually have a question that pertains to some of the other postings; > however, I'm going to preface with a couple of remarks. Some of you men > are behaving like children in the sand box squabbling over whose match > box car is the best, and most of you haven't purchased the cars you are > playing with. > > I review this board for interesting discussion regarding the sub-clave, > the various histories some contribute, the discussions of origins, > technical data, substantive remarks which very often are informative and > educational -- not bashing one another over utilities and models. > > In regard to the Howard Model, I requested from Mr. Howard to run the > M222 groups out of the project which I tested under, and he graciously > ran several one of the entire M222 (about 15% of over 750+++ > participants) + some others we threw in which are questionable as to > whether or not they are truly M222 even though some did SNP positive, > but they are so off modal that they are more than ambiguous, and perhaps > actually fall into the new sub-clave -- don't know that yet. > > The phylogenetic tree produced just happened to turn out very close to > what the histories surrounding times we would expect for ancestors of > these test subjects. Long story which I won't go it to; however it > supports a work in progress which began long before I requested Bill's > analysis. > > This is not the only analytical look, either. John Lochlan ran McGee; > the Jantzen Utility was Run; I asked Sandy Patterson to do a run; > Nordtv. & Harold ASD comparisons were also run. Believe it or not, > fellas, all the utilities and models for what they do are supportive of > one another. > > McGee has its shortfalls in that it operates on genetic distance; ASD > happens to estimate a bit too short; Patterson & Howard were actually > very close together with time lines, and Howard's tree is spectacular. > > I would suggest strongly to opinionate all you want, but until the rest > of you develop your own models and/or utilities and write papers of the > findings, play nice in the sand box because for one I am getting sick of > it. > > Now onto my question: Has anyone looked into what the genetic impact on > the middle east that of the Europeans impressed into the Roman Army, > Europeans during the crusades, and the Celtic settlements in Turkey (the > Galatians for you Bible readers) and elsewhere might have had in regard > to the recent R1b discussions recently on this list? Susan > 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 >