Richard Pence wrote: > Well, Max, how much do you think I ought to spend to find out that > there is a 50 percent chance that I and some other person with the > name PENCE are related within 7 generations? > > You are the marketing director of a firm that is in this business, > so you tell me. I always thought that even 1 percent wrong gives > you a serious genealogical problem. Hi Richard, I think you will agree with me that information has different values for different people, and you probably will also agree that the same way 1 percent wrong gives you a serious genealogical problem, there are situations where 1 percent clue can solve a serious genealogical problem. Let's look at it, therefore, in a more analytical way: there are subjective perceptions, pro and con, and then, there's the science. Every one has the right to chose their own approach towards something, and so, it is within your right to believe that time has not come for you to add DNA to the set of tools available for your genealogy research, because you don't know enough of it. That's OK. On the opposite side you have those that found enormous value to it. Just join the DNA-GENEALOGY list at Rootsweb and check it. The science is there for everybody to check it thoroughly. The customers are there for you to question them and challenge their findings directly. I don't think it's fair for their findings to be challenged without giving them the opportunity to interact with you. And I don't think it is fair to challenge the science without fully understanding it. That's my humble opinion. Max Blankfeld max@familytreedna.com