Everett M. Greene wrote: > If anyone can solve this problem, I'd like to hear about it. > I have an umpteenth generation Xerox copy of a hand-written > family genealogy of significant size... I have various documents of varying quality. My grandmother typed her father's family history for him, and then added to it--using a Selectric ball that no OCR seems to cope with. Other documents are faded or hand-written. If they won't scan, I put on my headset and read them into ViaVoice. Even with genealogical material--lots of names of people and places, not in the program's dictionary, AND interference from noise in the house, I still manage to average 1200 words per hour including time for corrections and "retraining" the software. Dragon Naturally Speaking is better than ViaVoice. -- Wes Groleau I've noticed lately that the paranoid fear of computers becoming intelligent and taking over the world has almost entirely disappeared from the common culture. Near as I can tell, this coincides with the release of MS-DOS. -- Larry DeLuca

Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:04:41 +0100, Hugh Watkins <hugh.watkins@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >Steve Hayes wrote: [SNIP] > > > >Custodian 3 is used by one-namers > > I looked at Custodian 2, and it seemed useful for managing sources, less > useful for managing and linking information. > > There is also Clooz, but that that is also not quite what I'm thinking of. There is also Bygones. This is available for PC and Mac and it is free! The underlying database is Filemaker, but you dont need Filemaker to run it, just the "application". It allows event dates and what are called Log Files. The way I have it organised the Log Files are families sorted by the head of the family and then by event. However you can sort and search on any other categories, provided that they are in the database. -- Thanks and regards, Shane. "A closed mouth gathers no feet!" Email: Beware the invalid word! shane at wonk dot demon dot co dot uk Website: http://www.wonk.demon.co.uk/

"Lesley Robertson" <l.a.robertson@tnw.tudelft.nl> writes: > "Dale DePriest" <Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote > > Anne Brick wrote: > >> I have a pile of letters written during WW1 by my father and his brother > >> and would like to be able to type them up for family distribution > I am > >> a very slow typist and none of my children can read the older hand > >> writing. Does any one know of a share ware program that I would be able > >> to try? > > > > If a person cannot read it then a computer program is unlikely to be able > > to do it. Maybe you could teach your children to type. > > > The OP was aksing about speech recognition, NOT character recognition (see > the subject line). With speech recognition, the user reads the text aloud, > into a microphone, and the softweare does the typing. This message is coming > to you via such a system. I find it extremely useful, but it's not a > shareware programme. The OP said that his/her children couldn't /read/ the material. Recognizing spoken mumbles, hems, haws, etc. won't help anyone. If anyone can solve this problem, I'd like to hear about it. I have an umpteenth generation Xerox copy of a hand-written family genealogy of significant size...

"Dale DePriest" <Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote in message news:13qk8ptb3v7j40b@corp.supernews.com... > > > Anne Brick wrote: >> Hi >> I have a pile of letters written during WW1 by my father and his brother >> and would like to be able to type them up for family distribution > I am >> a very slow typist and none of my children can read the older hand >> writing. Does any one know of a share ware program that I would be able >> to try? >> >> Anne >> > > If a person cannot read it then a computer program is unlikely to be able > to do it. Maybe you could teach your children to type. > The OP was aksing about speech recognition, NOT character recognition (see the subject line). With speech recognition, the user reads the text aloud, into a microphone, and the softweare does the typing. This message is coming to you via such a system. I find it extremely useful, but it's not a shareware programme. Lesley Robertson

"D. Stussy" <spam@bde-arc.ampr.org> wrote in message news:fodncj$1s2$2@snarked.org... > "David Harper" <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote in message > news:SWhqj.1617$N53.1115@newsfe1-win.ntli.net... >> D. Stussy wrote: >> > I think you're getting ahead of us. How much of a DNA contribution is >> > worthy of note? >> >> ... >> I hope this helps to clarify things. > > I wasn't looking for clarification. I know exactly who contributes what. > The rhetorical point of the question was that the contribution is so > insignificant, it's NOT worth mentioning.... > You'd get into difficulties if you were relying on mtDNA for genealogical purposes.... Lesley Robertson

"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:u83iq3d8vfgnddl8566tsd9hug2ihju95m@4ax.com... > If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one to > enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like then? > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080205/ap_on_sc/embryo_research > > LONDON - British scientists say they have created human embryos containing DNA > from two women and a man in a procedure that researchers hope might be used > one day to produce embryos free of inherited diseases. > ADVERTISEMENT > > Though the preliminary research has raised concerns about the possibility of > genetically modified babies, the scientists say that the embryos are still > only primarily the product of one man and one woman. > > "We are not trying to alter genes, we're just trying to swap a small > proportion of the bad ones for some good ones," said Patrick Chinnery, a > professor of neurogenetics at Newcastle University involved in the research. > > The research was presented at a scientific conference recently, but has not > been published in a scientific journal. > > The process aims to create healthy embryos for couples to avoid passing on > genes carrying diseases. > > The genes being replaced are the mitochondria, a cell's energy source, which > are contained outside the nucleus in a normal female egg. Mistakes in the > mitochondria's genetic code can result in serious diseases like muscular > dystrophy, epilepsy, strokes and mental retardation. > > In their research, Chinnery and colleagues used normal embryos created from > one man and one woman that had defective mitochondria in the woman's egg. They > then transplanted that embryo into an emptied egg donated from a second woman > who had healthy mitochondria. > > The research is being funded by the Muscular Dystrophy Campaign, a British > charity. > > Only trace amounts of a person's genes come from the mitochondria, and experts > said it would be incorrect to say that the embryos have three parents. > > "Most of the genes that make you who you are are inside the nucleus," Chinnery > said. "We're not going anywhere near that." > > So far, 10 such embryos have been created, though they have not been allowed > to develop for more than five days. Chinnery hoped that after further > experiments in the next few years the process might be available to parents > undergoing in-vitro fertilization. > > "If successful, this research could give families who might otherwise have a > bleak future a chance to avoid some very grave diseases," said Francoise > Shenfield, a fertility expert with the European Society of Human Reproduction > and Embryology. Shenfield was not connected to the Newcastle University > research. > > Similar experiments have been conducted in animals in Japan, and has already > led to the birth of healthy mice who had their mitochondria genes corrected. > > Shenfield said that further tests to assess the safety and efficacy of the > process were necessary before it could be offered as a potential treatment. > > A bill to allow the procedure to be regulated as a therapy for couples - once > it is proven to work - is expected to be discussed in Britain's House of > Commons in March. > > > -- > Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa > Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm > Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com > E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk If the software can represent other instances of 'multiple parents' (as in birth, foster, and/or adopted) then it wouldn't be a big stretch to cover this situation. However, I'm aware that even the existing cases are not widely supported in genealogy programs Tony Proctor

On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 12:42:26 GMT, David Harper <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote: >The three people involved contributed DNA as follows: > >Mother: 23 chromosomes, around 3 billion DNA "letters" >Father: 23 chromosomes, around 3 billion DNA "letters" >Egg donor woman: mitochondrial DNA, about 16,000 DNA "letters" > >The mitochondria are sometimes called the "power plants" of the cell >because they produce ATP, a molecule that is an essential source of >energy for all of the other chemical processes going on within a cell. > >The fact that they have their own DNA, independent of the nucleus of the >cell, is intriguing, and has led biologists to hypothesise that the >mitochondria are actually descendants of ancient bacteria which formed a >symbiotic relationship with other organisms early in the history of >multi-cellular life on Earth. > >However, the mitochondrial DNA is tiny in comparison with the 46 >chromosomes that we inherit from our parents: 16,000 DNA "letters" >compared to six billion. It is also tiny in terms of the number of >genes it contains: a mere 37, compared to the estimated 20,000 to 25,000 >genes that are contained in the chromosomes. > >The mitochondrial DNA does not carry any of the genes for >characteristics that we normally regard as inherited, such as hair >colour, height, and so forth. In that sense, it doesn't make much of a >contribution from a genealogical standpoint. > >However, it can, unfortunately, contain errors, and these can give rise >to genetic defects in the same way as defective genes on the >chromosomes. A mother with a genetic defect in her mitochondrial DNA >would pass that on to all of her children, since we inherit our >mitochondrial DNA solely from our mothers. > >The purpose of the research that was reported this week is to help such >women to have healthy children. The donor woman would be someone >without a defect in the mitochondrial DNA. > >I hope this helps to clarify things. Thank you, yes it does help to clarify them. But, if I understand you correctly, even if the children were healthy, they would still pass on defective mitochondrial DNA to *their* children? -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

D. Stussy wrote: > "David Harper" <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote in message > news:SWhqj.1617$N53.1115@newsfe1-win.ntli.net... >> D. Stussy wrote: >>> I think you're getting ahead of us. How much of a DNA contribution is >>> worthy of note? >> ... >> I hope this helps to clarify things. > > I wasn't looking for clarification. I know exactly who contributes what. > The rhetorical point of the question was that the contribution is so > insignificant, it's NOT worth mentioning.... Oops, I didn't realise it was a rhetorical question. But it's a subject that causes a great deal of confusion, so I hope that other readers found it helpful. David Harper Cambridge, England

Steve Hayes wrote: > On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 12:42:26 GMT, David Harper <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> > wrote: > >> The three people involved contributed DNA as follows: >> >> Mother: 23 chromosomes, around 3 billion DNA "letters" >> Father: 23 chromosomes, around 3 billion DNA "letters" >> Egg donor woman: mitochondrial DNA, about 16,000 DNA "letters" >> [SNIP] >> The purpose of the research that was reported this week is to help such >> women to have healthy children. The donor woman would be someone >> without a defect in the mitochondrial DNA. >> >> I hope this helps to clarify things. > > Thank you, yes it does help to clarify them. > > But, if I understand you correctly, even if the children were healthy, they > would still pass on defective mitochondrial DNA to *their* children? The children would inherit healthy mitochondrial DNA from the egg donor, instead of the defective mitochondrial DNA from their mother. The daughters would then pass on the egg donor's healthy mitochondrial DNA to all of their children. The mother is the only person to have defective mitochondrial DNA in this scenario. David Harper Cambridge, England

David Harper <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote: >Bob LeChevalier wrote: >> Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one to >>> enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like then? >>> >>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080205/ap_on_sc/embryo_research >>> >>> LONDON - British scientists say they have created human embryos containing DNA >>>from two women and a man in a procedure that researchers hope might be used >>> one day to produce embryos free of inherited diseases. >>> ADVERTISEMENT >>> >>> Though the preliminary research has raised concerns about the possibility of >>> genetically modified babies, the scientists say that the embryos are still >>> only primarily the product of one man and one woman. >> >> There might be four (or more). There might have been a surrogate >> mother, and there is some evidence that genetic development is >> controlled in the womb in part by the maternal hormonal environment. >> The genes we are born with are not exactly the same as the ones in the >> fertilized egg, so that a surrogate mother is arguably part of one's >> genetic ancestry. > >Strictly speaking, the DNA we are born with is precisely the set of >chromosomes that were in the fertilised egg (23 from father, 23 from >mother), plus the mitochondrial DNA, which comes from mother. > >However, the expression of the genes in the DNA is controlled by a >number of complex factors. By "expression", I mean which genes are active. Yes. I was referring to epigenetic signals (had to look up the term), which are apparently passed along multigenerationally, but can be altered by environmental conditions. They aren't apparently letters in the DNA code, but are part of the DNA nonetheless. http://discovermagazine.com/2006/nov/cover/article_view?b_start:int=3&-C= is the article I was thinking of when I wrote. Clearly, if epigenetics is part of ones inherited genetic ancestry, but can be altered by environment in the womb, then a surrogate mother is arguably part of one's inherited ancestry. lojbab

"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message news:ccWdnXyCsdcpRTTanZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@rcn.net... > Steve Hayes wrote: > > If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one to > > enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like then? > > Thought we had that already? (g) > > Egg donor + sperm donor + incubator + the two persons > wanting a baby. And you forgot the countless adoptive and foster parents that have to clean up the mess later. ;-)

"David Harper" <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> wrote in message news:SWhqj.1617$N53.1115@newsfe1-win.ntli.net... > D. Stussy wrote: > > I think you're getting ahead of us. How much of a DNA contribution is > > worthy of note? > > ... > I hope this helps to clarify things. I wasn't looking for clarification. I know exactly who contributes what. The rhetorical point of the question was that the contribution is so insignificant, it's NOT worth mentioning....

Bob LeChevalier wrote: > Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote: >> If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one to >> enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like then? >> >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080205/ap_on_sc/embryo_research >> >> LONDON - British scientists say they have created human embryos containing DNA >>from two women and a man in a procedure that researchers hope might be used >> one day to produce embryos free of inherited diseases. >> ADVERTISEMENT >> >> Though the preliminary research has raised concerns about the possibility of >> genetically modified babies, the scientists say that the embryos are still >> only primarily the product of one man and one woman. > > There might be four (or more). There might have been a surrogate > mother, and there is some evidence that genetic development is > controlled in the womb in part by the maternal hormonal environment. > The genes we are born with are not exactly the same as the ones in the > fertilized egg, so that a surrogate mother is arguably part of one's > genetic ancestry. Strictly speaking, the DNA we are born with is precisely the set of chromosomes that were in the fertilised egg (23 from father, 23 from mother), plus the mitochondrial DNA, which comes from mother. However, the expression of the genes in the DNA is controlled by a number of complex factors. By "expression", I mean which genes are active. Biologists are still trying to understand how gene expression is controlled, particularly for those genes which we get in two copies, one from each parent. In some cases, it's always the paternal copy which is active, and in others, it's always the maternal copy. This book is a very good introduction to some of the issues involved: http://www.amazon.com/X-Sex-Chromosome-Controls-Lives/dp/0674016211/ David Harper Cambridge, England

No, Homo Sapiens are not descendents of any other Homo species and were found in parallel in time with some of them. They were created as Home Sapiens and there is no evidence of any evolution in them. dogqruomlrsa@yahoo.com wrote: > Homo erectus lived from an estimated 2,000,000 down to 100,000 years > ago. Java and Peking man are included among Homo erectus. > Locations: Europe, India, China, Southeastern Asia, and Africa. > Height: 5 feet 2 inches to 6 feet; Weight: 100 to 150 pounds. Fossils: > Jaws, teeth, and an occasional skull cap and thighbone have been > uncovered. In 1984, a well-preserved almost complete erectus was > discovered in Kenya. Remarkably similar erectus bones and tools have > surfaced in Africa, Asia, and Europe. > Brain Capacity: Donald Johanson says 850 cubic centimeters to 900 c.c. > Richard Leakey claims 900 c.c. to 1100 c.c.. compared to 350 - 400 > c.c. for australopithecines, 650 c.c. for Homo habilis and 1400 c.c > for humans. It is thought that erectus' brain weighed around seven > ounces at birth. It would mature at thirty-two ounces compared to > forty-five ounces for an adult human. > Johanson describes Homo erectus as "tall, thin, and barrel-chested." > Their weight and height would place them in the top 17 percent of > modern human males. Based on reconstructed skeleton of a twelve-year- > old male, Johanson believes erectus had a body shaped like many > African groups today. But there were differences.... > > http://groups.google.com/group/familytreesyvs -- _ _ Dale DePriest /`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs

Anne Brick wrote: > Hi > I have a pile of letters written during WW1 by my father and his brother > and would like to be able to type them up for family distribution > I am > a very slow typist and none of my children can read the older hand > writing. Does any one know of a share ware program that I would be able > to try? > > Anne > If a person cannot read it then a computer program is unlikely to be able to do it. Maybe you could teach your children to type. Dale -- _ _ Dale DePriest /`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs

D. Stussy wrote: > "Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:u83iq3d8vfgnddl8566tsd9hug2ihju95m@4ax.com... >> If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one > to >> enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like > then? >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080205/ap_on_sc/embryo_research >> >> LONDON - British scientists say they have created human embryos containing > DNA >> from two women and a man in a procedure that researchers hope might be > used >> one day to produce embryos free of inherited diseases. >> ... > > Very good question. However, this can also be called genetic engineering > and thus there may be NO parents! > > I think you're getting ahead of us. How much of a DNA contribution is > worthy of note? The three people involved contributed DNA as follows: Mother: 23 chromosomes, around 3 billion DNA "letters" Father: 23 chromosomes, around 3 billion DNA "letters" Egg donor woman: mitochondrial DNA, about 16,000 DNA "letters" The mitochondria are sometimes called the "power plants" of the cell because they produce ATP, a molecule that is an essential source of energy for all of the other chemical processes going on within a cell. The fact that they have their own DNA, independent of the nucleus of the cell, is intriguing, and has led biologists to hypothesise that the mitochondria are actually descendants of ancient bacteria which formed a symbiotic relationship with other organisms early in the history of multi-cellular life on Earth. However, the mitochondrial DNA is tiny in comparison with the 46 chromosomes that we inherit from our parents: 16,000 DNA "letters" compared to six billion. It is also tiny in terms of the number of genes it contains: a mere 37, compared to the estimated 20,000 to 25,000 genes that are contained in the chromosomes. The mitochondrial DNA does not carry any of the genes for characteristics that we normally regard as inherited, such as hair colour, height, and so forth. In that sense, it doesn't make much of a contribution from a genealogical standpoint. However, it can, unfortunately, contain errors, and these can give rise to genetic defects in the same way as defective genes on the chromosomes. A mother with a genetic defect in her mitochondrial DNA would pass that on to all of her children, since we inherit our mitochondrial DNA solely from our mothers. The purpose of the research that was reported this week is to help such women to have healthy children. The donor woman would be someone without a defect in the mitochondrial DNA. I hope this helps to clarify things. David Harper Cambridge, England

"Steve Hayes" <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:u83iq3d8vfgnddl8566tsd9hug2ihju95m@4ax.com... > If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one > to > enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like > then? > > http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080205/ap_on_sc/embryo_research > Legacy can do it already. No problem. Available: http://www.legacyfamilytreestore.com/?Click=1192 8. DNA - Legacy now lets you record DNA marker test results from several different companies. 27. Child-Parent Relationships - The link between a child and his/her father and mother can now be specified and sourced. The existing Child Status field, which used to cover both the child status and the relationship between child and parents, now only refers to the status, such as Twin, Triplet, Stillborn, etc. The new Parent Relationship fields are used to record how the child is associated with each parent, such as Biological, Adopted, Guardian, Sealed, Step, as well as a place to record Challenged and Disproved relationships. These new fields are displayed on the Children List window as well as the Parents List window.

Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@hotmail.com> wrote: >If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one to >enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like then? > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080205/ap_on_sc/embryo_research > >LONDON - British scientists say they have created human embryos containing DNA >from two women and a man in a procedure that researchers hope might be used >one day to produce embryos free of inherited diseases. >ADVERTISEMENT > >Though the preliminary research has raised concerns about the possibility of >genetically modified babies, the scientists say that the embryos are still >only primarily the product of one man and one woman. There might be four (or more). There might have been a surrogate mother, and there is some evidence that genetic development is controlled in the womb in part by the maternal hormonal environment. The genes we are born with are not exactly the same as the ones in the fertilized egg, so that a surrogate mother is arguably part of one's genetic ancestry. lojbab

Steve Hayes wrote: > If this goes any further, we may need genealogy software that allows one to > enter three or more parents - and what would a pedigree chart look like then? Thought we had that already? (g) Egg donor + sperm donor + incubator + the two persons wanting a baby. And, if those two persons want a 2nd baby, chances are the egg donor, sperm donor AND incubator will all be different, thus nicely mucking up the DNA trails (or did I mean trials?). "Better Living Through Chemistry", as they advertised. Cheryl

Anne Brick wrote: > Hi > I have a pile of letters written during WW1 by my father and his brother > and would like to be able to type them up for family distribution > I am > a very slow typist and none of my children can read the older hand > writing. Does any one know of a share ware program that I would be able > to try? > > Anne > The last 2 versions (maybe earlier models as well?) of MS Word have speech recognition built in. Paul