Elizabeth Richardson wrote: >I note, however, that previous posts regarding the test applying >only to a single surname line are the overwhelming reason why DNA >tests have little value to most genealogy researchers. My own >research involves the descendants of one set of 3ggrandparents, who >happen to be from my maternal grandfather's line. Neither Y- nor mt >testing would have any pertinence. Most people are generalists, >interested in both female and male lines. DNA tests simply have no >application to the majority. Elizabeth, DNA tests do not need to have application for "the majority". All that is needed for the procedure to be added to the research tool kit is that it be shown to be useful in some cases This back and forward arguing here is meaningless, and I am finding it becoming increasingly personal apparently through disappointment that certain questions had not been answered as satisfactorily as they might have been. I am sorry to see the members here periodically bog down in what to us here in Australia appears to be nothing more than a belligerent and self-righteous head-butting over one petty issue or another. Any form of research MUST necessary be open-minded, and at least start off open-ended. I doubt that anyone defining their own particular research agenda too narrowly before the fact, or defending it too rigorously against assumptions and procedures accepted as common-place across interdisciplinary thresholds will gain much credibility as research scholars. Whether someone is making money out of it is not at issue. OK? Let's keep it open and friendly. Thanks, Gil Gil Hardwick <gruagach@highway1.com.au>