Yes, I agree. BUT . . . I have personally really appreciated the input from everyone! Perhaps a list is needed to discuss and evaluate these new and emerging tools. Even $99 is a lot for me to drop on faulty test results. Diane O'ConnorTiconderoga, NY USA From: irl-kerry-request@rootsweb.com Subject: IRL-KERRY Digest, Vol 8, Issue 171 To: irl-kerry@rootsweb.com Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 01:00:02 -0600 --Forwarded Message Attachment-- From: wdromanski@hotmail.com To: irl-kerry@rootsweb.com Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 12:36:39 +0000 Subject: [IRL-KERRY] Those who know the least know it the loudest. The DNA Discussion. Let's love the DNA discussion to a more appropriate place, unless, of course, it has particular relevance to County Kerry genealogy. William D Romanski --Forwarded Message Attachment-- From: bjmahon31@verizon.net To: irl-kerry@rootsweb.com Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:14:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [IRL-KERRY] IRL-KERRY Digest, Vol 8, Issue 170 I also had problems with Ancestry DNA. They show a map but used my family tree to pinpoint the locations. They also gave me many matches. None of them had any of my family names. I even contacted several of them and they were also at a loss as to how we were connected. My DNA site is now down (has been since yesterday afternoon) so cannot access any new information. Waste of money. -----Original Message----- From: irl-kerry-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:irl-kerry-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of irl-kerry-request@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 3:00 AM To: irl-kerry@rootsweb.com Subject: IRL-KERRY Digest, Vol 8, Issue 170 Today's Topics: 1. The continuing Ancestry DNA (Lois Casson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 22:10:20 -0500 From: Lois Casson <lcasson@cox.net> Subject: [IRL-KERRY] The continuing Ancestry DNA To: irl-kerry@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <5260A69C.30908@cox.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Okay, this one is hard to believe. Last week Ancestry told me I was 97% Scandinavian, 3% unknown. This week AncestryDNA made a big announcement that it has "evolved" and everyone gets new information. Today I am 36% Great Britain (still bogus), 25% Swedish, 23% Western European (also off), 5% Irish and 11% trace (made up of 5% Iberian Peninsula, 5% Eastern European, <1% European Jew). If they evolve enough they may get it right. I can't wait to see what FamilyTreeDNA comes up with. As far as I am concerned, Ancestry has absolutely no credibility. They gave me results in 3 weeks that they told me would take 6-8 and then change everyone's a week later. Lo in Flo ------------------------------ To contact the IRL-KERRY list administrator, send an email to IRL-KERRY-admin@rootsweb.com. To post a message to the IRL-KERRY mailing list, send an email to IRL-KERRY@rootsweb.com. __________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to IRL-KERRY-request@rootsweb.com with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body of the email with no additional text. End of IRL-KERRY Digest, Vol 8, Issue 170 ***************************************** --Forwarded Message Attachment-- From: marymcs@talktalk.net CC: irl-wexford@rootsweb.com; irl-cork@rootsweb.com To: irl-kerry@rootsweb.com Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 00:02:55 +0100 Subject: [IRL-KERRY] Names not appearing in 19th C documents I've been chewing over the non appearance of names in the Tithe Lists and the Griffiths. Would I be correct in thinking that a name would ONLY be recorded if that person held a lease on the land that he / rarely she lived and worked on? In other words, the head of the household / family's name would appear, but the sons who were working and living in the same place, would not appear. I am minded of the instructions given to the census data compilers about farmers and their children who would appear as ' farmer's sons and daughter ' - but only if living in the same house. If they were living next door, say married with their own family, yet working on the family farm, they would not be termed ' farmer's sons ' but agricultural labourers. Might a similar situation account for names not appearing in the Tithes and Griffiths - even when we know for certain that they were living in a particular town land and parish? A puzzled Mary