On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 2:38:33 PM UTC-7, Thomas Milton Tinney, Sr. wrote: > On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 2:01:09 PM UTC-7, taf wrote: > > On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 1:19:27 PM UTC-7, Thomas Milton Tinney, Sr. wrote: > > > > > I agree that this discussion should discontinue, as well, because it all > > > boils down to basic philosophical differences. [The proposal that one type > > > of organism could descend from another type goes back to some of the first > > > pre-Socratic Greek philosophers, such as Anaximander and Empedocles.] . . > > > > Ah, and finally, finally, we see the crux of the matter. DNA cannot be reliably used for genealogy, because DNA supports evolution that is antithetical to your philosophy. > > > > > TAF, is an exceedingly learned man, . . . He does not know, however, the > > > totality of the field of research, . . . he tries to put up a smoke screen > > > of his intellectual skills, which are prodigious, when I am only simply > > > pointing out, some of the most obvious inconsistencies of what is promised > > > vs. real time similar problems, which create in my mind a "mass of > > > confusion" as to the viability of DNA use. > > > > Except these inconsistencies only exist due to your lack of familiarity with the underlying principles (both the physiological mechanisms and the testing). It is not 'putting up a smoke screen' to try to explain why the aspects you perceive to be a problem are not relevant to the application of DNA to genealogical testing. Further, you repeatedly overreach in suggesting that any problem with any aspect of our understanding of DNA invalidates all DNA-based results. This is no more valid than to suggest that the frequent indexing errors on Ancestry.com invalidate the images of primary documents found there. > > > > taf > ---------------------------------- > REPLY: > TAF, you are HALF-way home. DNA does not support EITHER one. Yes, it does not support my philosophy, NOR does it support evolution. Conjectures offer no support at all, because the sample sizes and availability over time do not exist. From a Christian standpoint, many saints' bodies from Adam on down, have already been resurrected; from a secular standpoint, mass movements, like the Syrian migrations of today, Chinatowns and pockets of ethnic groups, do not make geographic maps realistic. It is all sad, comic DNA fantasy. And yes, TAF, I have been reading over time, thousands of professional and popular articles on the subject, Googled worldwide, etc. CONCLUSION. There is more scientific reliability in weather forecasting, than various comic DNA fantasy projections. What your particular sect of Christianity believes happens to dead bodies is not connected to genealogy or DNA, which are based on facts rather than faith. (It does raise questions about whether you even understand the difference between fact and belief.)