Now both major companies, 23&Me and FTDNA, are testing autosomal DNA, which shows RELATIONSHIPS between males/females, males/males, and females/females.  I've tested with both.  And there's a wonderful site called GedMatch, which is free, that accepts raw data from both companies and shows relationships for you from both.  ________________________________ From: Marjorie Devore <scarlett1@mchsi.com> To: njhunter@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 10:50 PM Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] the Stout Discussion; The Problem with any Source that isn't Primary. On 3/30/2012 8:01 PM, Gary in Berkeley wrote: I accept your two cents, even tho' I am waiting to check the Lottery tonight! does theDNA khave to be from a male Stout descendant?I can do that if so, marjorie parker devore in Illinois > Well put, Brownie. >      Mistaken copies of my family history abound, taken from unsupported public 'trees', no thanks to an early researcher making quantum leaps of faith that have been proven outlandishly wrong. But, the wind-horse is out of the barn, spreading errant messages. >      Mary Fox and the Bonhams, et al, are some of my shirttail kin, and are interesting to know about, so are in my tree. >      Cheers, >      Gary Smith > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: BMacKie<lu2silly@yahoo.com> > To: Kay Larsen<kaysfo@yahoo.com>, njhunter@rootsweb.com > Sent: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 21:24:51 -0000 (UTC) > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] the Stout Discussion;    The Problem with any Source that isn't Primary. > > Many people are afraid to buck the writers of some of the early family histories.  We've had that problem with  Bonham material.  When one of us presents "new evidence" from primary or secondary sources it is not readily accepted.  So the myths continue to be circulated. We've had so much trouble with the Mayflower Soc. and Hezekiah's second family, but recently I (from Malakiah) matched autosomal DNA with a person from Hezekiah's first family, and the Mayflower Soc. has agreed to accept DNA results along with the paper trail.  I'm not interested in another lineage society, but many are.  Internet research can be quite satisfactory, if one is patient and knows how to use it properly and if one is actually researching and not "borrowing" information from someone else.  Staying away from others' "trees" and not using Ancestry.com and the LDS (unless you're looking at primary sources only) is mandatory.  There are way too many "copycats" in this >  business.  :-) And we know that the problem is they're usually copying the wrong information.  Just my two cents. > > > Brownie MacKie, Bonham researcher > > > > ________________________________ >  From: Kay Larsen > To: "njhunter@rootsweb.com" > Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 3:09 PM > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] the Stout Discussion; The Problem with any Source that isn't Primary. > > AMEN, Jack.  You are so right! > > > From: Jack Fallin > To: njhunter@rootsweb.com > Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 1:59 PM > Subject: Re: [NJHUNTER] the Stout Discussion; The Problem with any Source that isn't Primary. > > Dear All, > > Although I do not have any Stout links, I've followed this discussion with interest.  At one point, someone pointed out that the lack of original source references is a problem with internet research.  The problem is much larger than that.  The book cited by Nancy in her note is perhaps late enough (1970) to have included the primary sources for the information the author gives, although those sources don't appear in the quoted section.  It was far more common in earlier "Family" genealogical books to provide absolutely no reference to the primary sources.  It was as if the researcher, convinced of his or her own skills, expected the work to always be accepted as gospel.  The result creates two separate problems: > > 1.  The book may be wrong -- but because it doesn't provide a means for directly checking against a primary source, the reader is left with the very difficult task of going back and finding/guessing what the author used. > > 2.  Perhaps worse, the existence of the book tends to dry up original research by giving the perhaps false impression that all the necessary work has been done so family members should just assume everything it says is right. > > Although not a Stout, we Holcombe researchers have the above described problem in spades.  We actually have two books (one very large and seemingly comprehensive) that seem to cover the whole field -- but there is not a primary source reference anywhere in either one. > > Jack Fallin > Walnut Creek, CA > > On Mar 30, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Nancy Willis wrote: > >> My family had connections to these Stouts and my information comes from the second edition of 'Stout and Allied Families' 1970, Compiled and Edited by Herald F. Stout, Read Admiral, United States navy (Retired). >> My connection is much further down the line in Indiana I think. >> >> In it he does relate the story of Penelope Van Princin. He ways it is difficult to tell how much of the history is fact and how much is legend. He also mentions the Kent or (Lent) >> >> He says: "'Marriages before 1699' records Richard Stout and Penelope Kent (or Lent), widow of Van Printzen 1634/35. He says that date is in error (at least biologically) is evident on an examinatioin of the other data available. Reasonably, from known vital statistics, Penelope could not have been born until 1622, and a second marriage at age fourteen years of age would be highly unlikely. Also, since the last child of this union was not born until 1669, tis would serve to fortify the contentioin for correctness of a 1622 birthdate." >> The book appears well researched. >> I have come across over the years the story of Penelope's survival in other places but as the author says no way to know fact or legend. >> Nancy Willis >> Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > Visit the Hunterdon County GenWeb page at: http://www.rootsweb.com/~njhunter ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NJHUNTER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message