Note: The Rootsweb Mailing Lists will be shut down on April 6, 2023. (More info)
RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Home

Results for list 'queen'

Total: 2/2
    1. Re: [QUEEN] 464 Mutation Follow-up
    2. Rolla Queen

    3. Gene, Don't go getting goofy on me. I can't agree with your assessment that the 3 matches on 464c are coincident. These 3 individuals share a common ancestor more recently with each other than they do with the rest of the group. That is the most logical explanation and must be ruled out before you start claiming coincidence. You Group 1 Queens really need to take a close look at this, focus in on it, especially since one of the donors also claims relationship to Hence Queen - and the other Hence donor does not have this mutation - which means........ I don't follow your arguments about the adoption. Have you been drinking my birthday punch?!! Rolla http://webpages.charter.net/rlqueen/DNA/queenmarker.htm http://www.familytreedna.com/public/queenDNA/ http://webpages.charter.net/rlqueen -------Original Message------- From: O Eugene Queen Date: 05/08/05 12:44:20 To: [email protected] Subject: [QUEEN] 464 Mutation Follow-up Regarding Glenda's observations of allele 464... 1. I, too, will await a response from Rolla regarding the technical aspects. 2. I concur with the writer, John Chandler, regarding the example of why the names of donors who are close relatives should not be released until or unless they have reviewed the results of YDNA tests and concur with the release of their name. 3. The 3 Queen DNA samples with mutations on 464c do NOT appear to be anything other than coincidental mutations - except for the possibility of my John R. Queen. If there is a "problem" in his lineage, it clearly appears to have been an adoption issue. It is hoped that more samples will resolve this issue. Gene ==== QUEEN Mailing List ==== Visit Reiley Kidd's homepg to view Queen information compiled and catagorized by first name: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Bluffs/2864/ QUEEN YDNA PROJECT http://www.familytreedna.com/surname_join.asp?code=X96855&special=True http://www.ysearch.org/ ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.7 - Release Date: 5/9/2005

    05/09/2005 05:04:24
    1. The adoption (?) of John R. Queen of ca 1854
    2. O Eugene Queen

    3. Whadda ya mean "getting" goofy. I've been goofy all along. I'm also a flip-flopper as I look at more data. 1. The adoption (?) of John R. Queen of ca 1854. a. If Alfred's wife, Mary, had engaged in an affair with a male Queen Avon salesman in 1854 and the birth of John was one result of that affair - then Mary could not have kept John hid from her husband, Alfred. Since John, at age 5 or 6, was not in the Alfred Queen household of 1860; the assumption is that he was either missed in the census or was living in the home of his birth. Since John shows up in the Alfred Queen household at age 15 in 1870; the assumption is that he was Alfred and Mary's son, properly listed on the 1870 census or else he was adopted from another male Queen lineage between 1860 and 1870. b. YDNA results reveal that a descendant of this John R. does not carry the same DNA as that of one of John's supposed sibling. The DNA of that one sibling, James Henry Queen of 1847, has been confirmed via samples from two branches of his tree. One easy explanation is that John's donor sample truly reflects the DNA of John and thus John was an adopted son of Alfred and Mary. Another easy explanation is that Alfred's DNA was the same as that of old William and that two of Alfred's sons had mutations, two different mutations. With this explanation, the assumption is that YDNA did what YDNA does - mutated - and that coincidentally that of John was identical to two other distantly related Queens. Another easy explanation is that John R. Queen's DNA was identical to that of his blood (?) sibling, James Henry Queen, but somewhere down the line of John, a Queen Rawleigh products salesman was involved or else an adoption took place down the lineage from John. 2. There is no "2" right now. I'll get to it later. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rolla Queen" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 2:04 AM Subject: Re: [QUEEN] 464 Mutation Follow-up > Gene, > > Don't go getting goofy on me. I can't agree with your assessment that the > 3 > matches on 464c are coincident. These 3 individuals share a common > ancestor > more recently with each other than they do with the rest of the group. > That > is the most logical explanation and must be ruled out before you start > claiming coincidence. You Group 1 Queens really need to take a close look > at > this, focus in on it, especially since one of the donors also claims > relationship to Hence Queen - and the other Hence donor does not have this > mutation - which means........ > > I don't follow your arguments about the adoption. Have you been drinking > my > birthday punch?!! > > Rolla > > http://webpages.charter.net/rlqueen/DNA/queenmarker.htm > http://www.familytreedna.com/public/queenDNA/ > http://webpages.charter.net/rlqueen > > -------Original Message------- > > From: O Eugene Queen > Date: 05/08/05 12:44:20 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [QUEEN] 464 Mutation Follow-up > > Regarding Glenda's observations of allele 464... > > 1. I, too, will await a response from Rolla regarding the technical > aspects. > > 2. I concur with the writer, John Chandler, regarding the example of why > the > names of donors who are close relatives should not be released until or > unless they have reviewed the results of YDNA tests and concur with the > release of their name. > > 3. The 3 Queen DNA samples with mutations on 464c do NOT appear to be > anything other than coincidental mutations - except for the possibility of > my John R. Queen. If there is a "problem" in his lineage, it clearly > appears > to have been an adoption issue. It is hoped that more samples will resolve > this issue. > > Gene > > > ==== QUEEN Mailing List ==== > Visit Reiley Kidd's homepg to view Queen information > compiled and catagorized by first name: > http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Bluffs/2864/ > QUEEN YDNA PROJECT > http://www.familytreedna.com/surname_join.asp?code=X96855&special=True > http://www.ysearch.org/ > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005 > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.7 - Release Date: 5/9/2005 > > > ==== QUEEN Mailing List ==== > QUEEN (Q500) at ROOTSWEB > http://resources.rootsweb.com/surnames/q/u/QUEEN/ > QUEEN YDNA PROJECT > http://www.familytreedna.com/surname_join.asp?code=X96855&special=True > http://www.ysearch.org/ > > ============================== > Census images 1901, 1891, 1881 and 1871, plus so much more. > Ancestry.com's United Kingdom & Ireland Collection. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13968/rd.ashx >

    05/10/2005 01:33:54