I was reviewing Pace DNA chart on the Pace website and noticed that Burrell Pace descendents are listed separately from John and Sarah Pace of Surry, NC. It is my understanding that Burrell is a proven son of John and Sarah, so I was wondering if anyone on the list knows of any reason that Burrell descendents should not be grouped with John and Sarah Pace for the purpose of simplification. Thanks John Pace

I'm not sure what you mean by listed separately and not grouped with the John/Sarah results.   The chart as I see it this morning has the Burrell results listed right below the generic listings of the John and Sarah results.  The ones labeled Burrell are much more informative than the generic "John/Sarah" labelled results.  It is important to know which son of a particular common ancestor that each participant descends through to be able get the most of the DNA results. In fact, it is important to know exactly where each of the lineages branch from a common ancestor for correct DNA results interpretation. That is why I first created my separate spreadsheets of DNA results to help with the interpretation of the results.   The generic labels of William/Lambert and Richard/Cain and the Jesse labels hide necessary information for correct DNA interpretation.  For example, the generic labels for the Jesse? lineage hide the fact that the **DNA results** can be used to prove descent from Richmond Pace versus descending from his brothers Simeon or John.  There is a DNA change that occurred with Richmond Pace that his brothers do not have.  Through a very careful selection of participants, this DNA change has been proven to have occurred with Richmond Pace and not more recently.  To show that information, it is important to show that the two Richmond Pace participants are descendants of two of his sons  - John R. and William.  So the labels should be Jesse?-Richmond-John R and Jesse?-Richmond-William - not the generic Jesse.  This important discovery was found through the hard work of Darlene to find the 2nd participant through a different son of Richmond Pace as we were trying to determine whether the DNA change occurred with Richmond Pace or at a more recent generation.   This result was not found "by accident" but by finding an appropriate second test participant for the line for testing. The spreadsheets I have been creating and posting on a yearly basis are presented each year at the Pace reunion and published in the fall quarterly.  They are also available separately in the members only area of the PSA website (in the Bulletins section) for download which is the easiest way to read them as they are pdf files and can be zoomed in/zoomed out.  I don't have any problem with the spreadsheets being posted on the public Pace DNA website, they just have never been placed on that website.  There are also additional DNA results from the William Pace/Ruth Lambert line that are included on my spreadsheets but not included with the FTDNA results on the PSA page.  These results are for participants who tested at SMGF rather than FTDNA. Rebecca Christensen    --- On Sat, 11/21/09, John <pjohndeb@verizon.net> wrote: From: John <pjohndeb@verizon.net> Subject: [PACE] Burrell Pace DNA To: Pace@rootsweb.com Date: Saturday, November 21, 2009, 8:30 AM I was reviewing Pace DNA chart on the Pace website and noticed that Burrell Pace descendents are listed separately from John and Sarah Pace of Surry, NC. It is my understanding that Burrell is a proven son of John and Sarah, so I was wondering if anyone on the list knows of any reason that Burrell descendents should not be grouped with John and Sarah Pace for the purpose of simplification. Thanks John Pace ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to PACE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message