Go ahead and forward anything you want to the WVA group. I have attached a vetting format. Sue ----- Original Message ----- From: "Toney Kincaid" <tkincaid1@triad.rr.com> To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 1:39 PM Subject: Re: [KINCAID] DNA results for 135736 > Sue, > > I did contact Jo Anna and she is anxious to get her part done. She wanted > a > sample to go by in her vetting. I am looking for the old copy I had on > Harvey Kincaid for her to go by. I am still looking for it. > > The reason I am writing to you is to ask you if we could not keep these ( > your) posting on the West Virginia Kincaid group. Most of the people on > our > list is not part of the larger K-list. This may show them just how > important > it is to help us in the DNA project. > > Thanks, > > Toney K. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sue Liedtke" <seleaml@actionnet.net> > To: <kincaid@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 11:50 AM > Subject: [KINCAID] DNA results for 135736 > > >> Results for 135736's upgrade to 37 markers are now in. He matches the >> group >> A-1a AAV exactly at all markers. >> >> This is very, very interesting to the Fayette/Greenbrier WVA Kincaids and >> has implications for all Group A Kincaids as 135736 claims to George/Mary >> Campbell. 49289 in A-2b is vetted to the same ancestor. The vetting for >> 49289 was done by Leslie so we do not have the lineage available in the >> archives. I urge JoAnne (contact for 135736) to contact me for the >> vetting >> format. Bob (49289), I also urge you to contact me so that we can create >> a >> vetting post to submit to the list for review. Bob has the 9 at marker 15 >> (459b) which is the signature for set A-2. This makes reviewing his line >> of >> paramont interest as it calls into question the vetting. If both can be >> verified to George/Mary Campbell we will have an incidence of parallel >> mutation at this marker. This has implications for all A-2b Kincaids as >> it >> is possible that this marker has mutated several times. >> >> The paper trails in the Fayette area seem to indicate that almost all >> Kincaids in this region are descendents of Thomas/Hannah Tincher. The >> most >> logical lineage from the paperwork indicates that George/Mary Campbell, >> Thomas/Isabella/Eliza (130207 A-1a), William (33001 A-1c), and Harvey >> (101753 A-1a) are all sons of Thomas/Polly Davis (whom 33001 is vetted >> to). >> The paper trail also indicates that Thomas/Polly Davis is the son of >> Samuel >> of the 3 wives, who in turn is the son of Thomas/Hannah Tincher. 36856, >> 30078 and probably several more A-1a Kincaids from this region appear to >> be >> the descendents of John/Elizabeth Gillespie who is also appears to be the >> son of Thomas/Hannah Tincher. I urge all lines to work on vetting back to >> Thomas/Hannah so that the family relationships can be confirmed. >> >> SPECULATION FOLLOWS >> We know that Thomas's father is a John Kincaid and that Thomas appears >> 1st >> in Albemarle Co. I believe this John is John the Weaver and that many >> other >> A-1a Kincaids who trace from this area may either be his descendents or >> descendents of a brother or cousin. >> >> Sue Liedtke >> >> To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: >> http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > To see the Kincaid of all spellings DNA chart in Excel: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adgedge/Research/April%202004/Kincaid%20%20DNA.xls > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > KINCAID-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message