Jim, I am all in all this, believe me. Maybe I am having a hard catching up with the whole process and plan. Some comments below: On Oct 19, 2012, at 11:35 PM, Jim Bartlett wrote: > Craig > > Let's look on the positive side: > > The NN DNA website will show Y-DNA and mtDNA results. I will also post the NN matches and Common Ancestors on that website. Understood, and this may be helpful overall. As you know with our Kilby project (one of the 5 or 3 not yet linked) I will be astounded if any of that y-DNA matches any of the autosomal dna tests, and doubly astounded if it matches somebody elses Y-DNA study. This is what I am not clear on (for one). > > I added up the number of matches that everyone in our project have already gotten in Family Finder tests already on the books. It was from 7 of the 9 participants who had signed up by this morning. It shows we should have a number of NN Common Ancestors in there somewhere - this is good news. Now here you go. This starts to explain things. You are matching other tests who have taken at-DNA tests. Is that right? NOT Y-NDA or mt-DNA, but at-DNA. Here is where I really need clarification on what we are doing. Or, I should say, you are doing. > > On the contrary, Craig - the NN Common Ancestors will benefit the people who take this test; all the members of his/her family; all the descendants of those Ancestors, including many of us; and every one interested in NN families who will benefit by the determination of each Common Ancestor - each one of these will be good news to this list. By this I think you mean it will help everyone on our NN rootsweb list and those who are inputting their trees into our NN ancestry tree whether or not they do the test. Right? [I certainly hope so] I think we need to get to common language of what is what. We have so many different projects going. On the bright side, Jim. I received an e-mail from one your participants who is on rootsweb list who now has the motivation to start putting her ancestry into our NN tree. Yes, Jim. I suppose we are being cutting edge here, and I think it is a wonderful project. I can confidently predict we are all going to blown away by the results. It may take a good year to start making sense, but I know eventually this is going to a very worthwhile project. Craig > > Time will tell, but I think this list will play a key role in this. Let's give it a chance. > > Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! > > On Oct 19, 2012, at 10:00 PM, Craig Kilby <persisto1@gmail.com> wrote: > >> OK....I get all this part. This is just another building block we have. The FTDN web site itself isn't really going to tell us anything. But it will tell YOU something. >> >> I still don't know what you meant by 2,000 matches from just five participants, none of which are atDNA???? (Or two of them?) >> >> You'll have to patient with us. Obviously, only those who take the test will get the benefits of it, but this list can hopefully be a great forum to talk about who the Mystery Common Ancestors might be. Right? >> >> Craig > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to VA-NORTHERN-NECK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Craig I think I see the confusion here. The Y-DNA test uses only the Y-chromosome - the smallest chromosome of all (by far), but with the unique property of passing only from father to son. The mtDNA test uses only the mitochondrial DNA, which is not even a chromosome - it also has a unique property - passing only from mothers to children, not passed on by men The atDNA test uses the autosomal DNA, chromosomes 1 to 22, representing over 95% if all you DNA. It is passed from parents to children - you get 50% from each parent. These three tests are very different (apples, oranges, cranberries). They are each very powerful tools but don't interrelate. The genealogies do interrelate, but the DNA tools must be used separately (think hammer, saw and screwdriver when building a birdhouse) Hope this helps, Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! On Oct 20, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Craig Kilby <persisto1@gmail.com> wrote: > Jim, > > I am all in all this, believe me. Maybe I am having a hard catching up with the whole process and plan. Some comments below: > > On Oct 19, 2012, at 11:35 PM, Jim Bartlett wrote: > >> Craig >> >> Let's look on the positive side: >> >> The NN DNA website will show Y-DNA and mtDNA results. I will also post the NN matches and Common Ancestors on that website. > > Understood, and this may be helpful overall. As you know with our Kilby project (one of the 5 or 3 not yet linked) I will be astounded if any of that y-DNA matches any of the autosomal dna tests, and doubly astounded if it matches somebody elses Y-DNA study. This is what I am not clear on (for one). >> >> I added up the number of matches that everyone in our project have already gotten in Family Finder tests already on the books. It was from 7 of the 9 participants who had signed up by this morning. It shows we should have a number of NN Common Ancestors in there somewhere - this is good news. > > Now here you go. This starts to explain things. You are matching other tests who have taken at-DNA tests. Is that right? NOT Y-NDA or mt-DNA, but at-DNA. Here is where I really need clarification on what we are doing. Or, I should say, you are doing. >> >> On the contrary, Craig - the NN Common Ancestors will benefit the people who take this test; all the members of his/her family; all the descendants of those Ancestors, including many of us; and every one interested in NN families who will benefit by the determination of each Common Ancestor - each one of these will be good news to this list. > > By this I think you mean it will help everyone on our NN rootsweb list and those who are inputting their trees into our NN ancestry tree whether or not they do the test. Right? [I certainly hope so] > > I think we need to get to common language of what is what. We have so many different projects going. > > On the bright side, Jim. I received an e-mail from one your participants who is on rootsweb list who now has the motivation to start putting her ancestry into our NN tree. > > Yes, Jim. I suppose we are being cutting edge here, and I think it is a wonderful project. I can confidently predict we are all going to blown away by the results. It may take a good year to start making sense, but I know eventually this is going to a very worthwhile project. > > Craig >> >> Time will tell, but I think this list will play a key role in this. Let's give it a chance. >> >> Jim - Sent from my iPhone - FaceTime! >> >> On Oct 19, 2012, at 10:00 PM, Craig Kilby <persisto1@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> OK....I get all this part. This is just another building block we have. The FTDN web site itself isn't really going to tell us anything. But it will tell YOU something. >>> >>> I still don't know what you meant by 2,000 matches from just five participants, none of which are atDNA???? (Or two of them?) >>> >>> You'll have to patient with us. Obviously, only those who take the test will get the benefits of it, but this list can hopefully be a great forum to talk about who the Mystery Common Ancestors might be. Right? >>> >>> Craig >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to VA-NORTHERN-NECK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to VA-NORTHERN-NECK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message