John, Thanks so much for your tables, especially your Genetic Distance Table. I'm hoping to figure out how to hook up my printer so I can create a hard copy easier than hand copying. I manually modified your table to include only genetic distances 1 thru 4 & then color coded each one. My next chore is to modify your "Generations to TMRCA" to include only generations 4 thru 13 which will permit me to visualize a rough guestimate of yrs to TMRCA. Your tables are making me think outside the box. You're absolutely right that: (1) Thos (151270) is closer to Chas (1740) than he is to either of the James' (1760) (2) You're also right on that Henry (131072) should probably be in the Thos/Rebeca line rather than the James W. line Sherry, You're reading the table right. 134024 & 134403 have a zero genetic distance;i.e, they are a perfect match. Jack T.

I will make a table in years, but it will be only a rough approximation of the years - NOT AT ALL EXACT. The picture changes considerably if you use different probabilities. 75% (a 3 in 4 chance) yields an accurate result for me, as I am separated by 7 generations from Thomas/Rebecca, but it may not be so accurate for others. Using a 95% probability results in much larger numbers, i.e. more generations/years back to the MRCA, and seems to be way too conservative. I'll post the link to the new chart as soon as I can get it done. JK On Nov 16, 2009, at 12:22 PM, Jack R. Templeton wrote: > John, > Thanks so much for your tables, especially your Genetic Distance > Table. I'm hoping to figure out how to hook up my printer so I can > create a hard copy easier than hand copying. I manually modified your > table to include only genetic distances 1 thru 4 & then color coded > each one. My next chore is to modify your "Generations to TMRCA" to > include only generations 4 thru 13 which will permit me to visualize a > rough guestimate of yrs to TMRCA. Your tables are making me think > outside the box. > > You're absolutely right that: > (1) Thos (151270) is closer to Chas (1740) than he is to either of the > James' (1760) > (2) You're also right on that Henry (131072) should probably be in the > Thos/Rebeca line rather than the James W. line > > Sherry, > You're reading the table right. 134024 & 134403 have a zero genetic > distance;i.e, they are a perfect match. > > Jack T. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to KILGORE- > request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >