I was trying to save time and work by incorporating a little more data before posting the latest results. But, I'll tidy things up and post the short version as soon as I can, probably sometime tomorrow. I have requested FTDNA to re-check the results for KIT 38694. There are four equally plausible, perhaps implausible explanations, for the 9 marker mis-match in the 38-67 markers. 1) This lineage lived near nuclear waste at some point in its history, leading to an accelerated mutation rate that rivals speed records set at Bonneville Salt Flats. 2) The participant is related to Old William, but the split came a "few" generations before Old William. 3) The participant descends from Old William, but the line just has an overexcited mutation rate. Some families have reported accelerated mutation rates, but these tend to be witnessed throughout the line, not just one participant. Now, FTDNA says that even with the 10 marker mis-match at the 67 marker level, this participant has a 20% chance of sharing a common ancestor with Group 1 Queens at 9 generations ago, a 35% chance at 11 generations, and a 53% chance at 13 generations ago, as well as a 6% chance at 5-7 generations ago. Compared to a perfect match at the 67 marker level, a common ancestor is predicted at almost 100% at 6 generations. So if these results hold, it appears as if FTDNA must be figuring in how these markers affect the statistics. Clearly, they are not being treated the same as the first 37 markers. But all things being equal, most of the Group 1 Queens are looking at Old William as a possible common ancestor at 8-10 generations ago. Now, the fact that we have witness remarkable stability and "conservatism" in the marker results we have seen to date may be coloring our "expectation" about what is plausible, which makes these results seem implausible. Which leads us to the final explanation. 4) Someone screwed up! Rolla

----- Original Message ----- From: "Rolla Queen" <rolla.queen@charter.net> To: "'O Eugene Queen'" <EQueen@lexcominc.net>; "'QResearchers'" <QUEEN@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [QUEEN] Partial Results on 72192 snip > 1) This lineage lived near nuclear waste at some point in its history, > leading to an accelerated mutation rate that rivals speed records set at > Bonneville Salt Flats. snip I never considered that. By golly you may have hit on the right answer. Gene