>From my looking at my results there are oddball snps that I think are just noise. I had a few that belong in a J subclade .

We are in the same part of the Yfull experimental tree. Please contact me and we can see if we can find geographical or name similarity. Adam

I agree with Peter. Please move on. Thank you kindly. Best wishes, Ian -----Original Message----- From: Peter Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 8:04 AM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book This is all getting a little boring can this subject be dropped? I don't want lessons in English I just want to gain an understanding of DNA If I want to read the book, I will, if don't then I will move on, the book is being recommendation it isn't complusory reading lets not loose posters over such a silly issue. Regards Peter This e-mail is strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee(s). It may contain personal and confidential information and as such may be protected by the Data Protection Acts 1984 and 1998. If you are not the intended recipient of this email you must not disclose, copy or distribute its contents to any other person nor use its contents in any way or you may be acting unlawfully you must delete the email from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as contract, this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties. -----Original Message----- From: y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: 29 June 2014 10:48 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book Sorry, I used a homophone . . . meant censure rather than censor. John Beardsley -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth Nordtvedt Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 5:27 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book Debbie, Fortunately you, alone, can't censor the book, so that's not the issue. The thread began with a one sentence recommendation to read the book and did not include a review or analysis of the book. So your subsequent outburst of miscelaneous slander seems over the top and rather dark to me at least. But let's hope the brouha will wet the appetites of some and actually lead to more reading the book. I notice that among the folks on the book jacket saying positive things about their reaction to the book are hard scientists James D Watson and Edward O Wilson, and even soft scientist Lionel Tiger. Author Nicholas Wade was educated at England's Cambridge University in Natural Science, he was reporter or editor at the well known journals Science and Nature, and eventually science reporter/editor at the New York Times. So his was a long career of working at the interface of science and the general wider public with interest in science matters. The book was not meant to be a "peer reviewed" scientific article, for the little that has come to mean in today's world. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Kennett Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 1:54 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book John I am not in the least trying to censor the book. Note that Ken recommended the book to the list despite admitting that he hadn't even finished reading it. As I've tried to explain science is advanced by scientists doing research and writing scientific papers that are published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It is a free world and if a reporter manages to get a commisssion to write on a subject in which he has no academic training or expertise then so be it. If people choose to read his book then that is their choice. It is my choice not to read such a book. I prefer to spend my time reading the original scientific papers rather than someone else's misinterpretation of those papers. Other people have already commented on the shortcomings of the book and its lack of scientific rigour, and I merely thought it would be helpful for people to read those reviews if they wanted so that they can perhaps try and understand the scientific viewpoint if they do choose to read the book. These authors have explained the problems with the book far more eloquently than I can. I provided those links for the benefit of all list members and not just Americans. Nationality should have nothing to do with it. The author of the book is after all a Brit. As you will recall, I also provided a link to a scientific paper by Guido Barbujani "Human Races: Classifying People vs Understanding Diversity" which gives a good summary of the current scientific thinking on the subject of "race". I've provided a TinyURL below as the link got broken up by Rootsweb so perhaps people had difficulty accessing the paper: http://tinyurl.com/mvdt487 Perhaps you might like to have a look at this paper with an open mind and let us know what you think. If you know of any scientific papers that offer a different view perhaps you can share them with us. Can I suggest that we focus our discussions on the science and not on emotions. Debbie ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In an attempt to maintain a common terminology, here is a typical (Google) definition of "racism": --- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others --- Readers can compare that definition with Watson's published interview statement: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/fury-at-dna-pioneers-theory-africa ns-are-less-intelligent-than-westerners-394898.html --- Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really". He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true". --- From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> So who appointed you the definer of Watson's alleged "racist comments"?

Thank goodness we are not (yet) required to live by Google definitions of words. Do you want to try formulating a better meaning for the word, or shall we let the topic drop? Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Lawrence Mayka Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 7:48 AM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book In an attempt to maintain a common terminology, here is a typical (Google) definition of "racism": --- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others --- Readers can compare that definition with Watson's published interview statement: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/fury-at-dna-pioneers-theory-africa ns-are-less-intelligent-than-westerners-394898.html --- Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really". He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true". --- From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> So who appointed you the definer of Watson's alleged "racist comments"? ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

That's all folks ... this one was the very last post I read. I am sorry but I can not stay in there reading such offensive words. Opening a debate yes. Directly supporting a racist writter, no. The list has lost its sense diverging into politics and religion. Too bad the old doctors and other professors emeritus have such a grip on the "Truth". Didier, can you please remove me from the list and delete all posts I may have sent to it. Takk for meg. Nicolas -------- Original message -------- From: Kenneth Nordtvedt <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> Date:29/06/2014 23:29 (GMT+01:00) To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book Debbie, Fortunately you, alone, can't censor the book, so that's not the issue. The thread began with a one sentence recommendation to read the book and did not include a review or analysis of the book. So your subsequent outburst of miscelaneous slander seems over the top and rather dark to me at least. But let's hope the brouha will wet the appetites of some and actually lead to more reading the book. I notice that among the folks on the book jacket saying positive things about their reaction to the book are hard scientists James D Watson and Edward O Wilson, and even soft scientist Lionel Tiger. Author Nicholas Wade was educated at England's Cambridge University in Natural Science, he was reporter or editor at the well known journals Science and Nature, and eventually science reporter/editor at the New York Times. So his was a long career of working at the interface of science and the general wider public with interest in science matters. The book was not meant to be a "peer reviewed" scientific article, for the little that has come to mean in today's world. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Kennett Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 1:54 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book John I am not in the least trying to censor the book. Note that Ken recommended the book to the list despite admitting that he hadn't even finished reading it. As I've tried to explain science is advanced by scientists doing research and writing scientific papers that are published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It is a free world and if a reporter manages to get a commisssion to write on a subject in which he has no academic training or expertise then so be it. If people choose to read his book then that is their choice. It is my choice not to read such a book. I prefer to spend my time reading the original scientific papers rather than someone else's misinterpretation of those papers. Other people have already commented on the shortcomings of the book and its lack of scientific rigour, and I merely thought it would be helpful for people to read those reviews if they wanted so that they can perhaps try and understand the scientific viewpoint if they do choose to read the book. These authors have explained the problems with the book far more eloquently than I can. I provided those links for the benefit of all list members and not just Americans. Nationality should have nothing to do with it. The author of the book is after all a Brit. As you will recall, I also provided a link to a scientific paper by Guido Barbujani "Human Races: Classifying People vs Understanding Diversity" which gives a good summary of the current scientific thinking on the subject of "race". I've provided a TinyURL below as the link got broken up by Rootsweb so perhaps people had difficulty accessing the paper: http://tinyurl.com/mvdt487 Perhaps you might like to have a look at this paper with an open mind and let us know what you think. If you know of any scientific papers that offer a different view perhaps you can share them with us. Can I suggest that we focus our discussions on the science and not on emotions. Debbie ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

John I was responding to this comment: "I think the review by the NY Times was somewhat more charitable. There seems to be no question, though, that Wade's book has hit a raw nerve in some circles of his fellow Brits." The suggestion seemed to be that it was only Brits who had an issue with the book and I wanted to make clear that that was not the case. Many of the fiercest critics of Wade's book are in America. I was not making any comments about people's intelligence. I was suggesting that Wade's racist views would not be tolerated and supported here in the same way that they are in America. In fact his book has been largely ignored here. The review in The Times is the only I've seen. Perhaps I didn't phrase my words very carefully and I'm sorry if I've caused offence where none was intended. As Lawrence has argued, it is a perfectly objective and sensible approach to seek the views of people I trust before deciding whether or not to buy a book. Debbie -----Original Message----- From: y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: 29 June 2014 22:33 To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book "Can I suggest that we focus our discussions on the science and not on emotions. Debbie" hmmm . . . I thought I had been even toned in my post, but perhaps not. What I was objecting to Debbie are these comments of yours: 1) "Fortunately reviewers on this side of the Atlantic have been able to see through Wade's dangerous outdated, prejudiced and unscientific hogwash." 2) " It's perhaps not surprising that he's ended up in America. He would find much less tolerance of his views over here." The first I let slide, but after the second I called you on it. You are implying, intentionally or not, that on your side of the Atlantic intelligence is in greater supply than on ours. And like I said, by doing so you are acting in a typical stereotypical manner. You have been rather heatedly denouncing Mr. Wade's book, basing your indignation upon the reviews of others rather than reading the material and forming your own opinion. Not an objective approach, is it? You can make your argument without bringing ANY nationality into it, as you've demonstrated. When you fail to do so you are, in a round about manner, doing the very same thing you feel so strongly Mr. Wade has done in his book. John Beardsley --

For Heaven's sake Debbie - DROP IT - You are coming across as a dictatorial, pompous, know it all and bringing the English into disrepute. 90% of listers here are just not interested. For the sake of all our sanities let it go. You don't have to have the last word, really. Carol Gilbert foothead@one-name.org On 29 Jun 2014, at 23:13, Debbie Kennett <debbiekennett@gmail.com> wrote: > Ken > > I have provided links to critical views of Wade's work. I have yet to > receive any sensible response from anyone explaining why they disagree with > the technical points raised in those critical reviews. As you seem to be the > only person who has even attempted to read the book perhaps you can > enlighten me and point me to the scientific papers which are supposed to > support Nicholas Wade's view that there are distinct biological races. > > James Watson, as I'm sure you will know, was forced to retire early after > making racist comments: > > http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/fury-at-dna-pioneers-theory-africa > ns-are-less-intelligent-than-westerners-394898.html > > It's not surprising that he endorses Wade's book. I'm not familiar with the > other two scientists, but population geneticists have uniformaly denounced > Wade's book. > > Wade's education and work history are somewhat irrelevant. The focus should > be on the arguments. No one has yet provided any evidence in support of > Wade's arguments. > > Debbie > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Ken I have provided links to critical views of Wade's work. I have yet to receive any sensible response from anyone explaining why they disagree with the technical points raised in those critical reviews. As you seem to be the only person who has even attempted to read the book perhaps you can enlighten me and point me to the scientific papers which are supposed to support Nicholas Wade's view that there are distinct biological races. James Watson, as I'm sure you will know, was forced to retire early after making racist comments: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/fury-at-dna-pioneers-theory-africa ns-are-less-intelligent-than-westerners-394898.html It's not surprising that he endorses Wade's book. I'm not familiar with the other two scientists, but population geneticists have uniformaly denounced Wade's book. Wade's education and work history are somewhat irrelevant. The focus should be on the arguments. No one has yet provided any evidence in support of Wade's arguments. Debbie

This is all getting a little boring can this subject be dropped? I don't want lessons in English I just want to gain an understanding of DNA If I want to read the book, I will, if don't then I will move on, the book is being recommendation it isn't complusory reading lets not loose posters over such a silly issue. Regards Peter This e-mail is strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee(s). It may contain personal and confidential information and as such may be protected by the Data Protection Acts 1984 and 1998. If you are not the intended recipient of this email you must not disclose, copy or distribute its contents to any other person nor use its contents in any way or you may be acting unlawfully you must delete the email from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as contract, this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties. -----Original Message----- From: y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of John Sent: 29 June 2014 10:48 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book Sorry, I used a homophone . . . meant censure rather than censor. John Beardsley -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth Nordtvedt Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 5:27 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book Debbie, Fortunately you, alone, can't censor the book, so that's not the issue. The thread began with a one sentence recommendation to read the book and did not include a review or analysis of the book. So your subsequent outburst of miscelaneous slander seems over the top and rather dark to me at least. But let's hope the brouha will wet the appetites of some and actually lead to more reading the book. I notice that among the folks on the book jacket saying positive things about their reaction to the book are hard scientists James D Watson and Edward O Wilson, and even soft scientist Lionel Tiger. Author Nicholas Wade was educated at England's Cambridge University in Natural Science, he was reporter or editor at the well known journals Science and Nature, and eventually science reporter/editor at the New York Times. So his was a long career of working at the interface of science and the general wider public with interest in science matters. The book was not meant to be a "peer reviewed" scientific article, for the little that has come to mean in today's world. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Kennett Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 1:54 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book John I am not in the least trying to censor the book. Note that Ken recommended the book to the list despite admitting that he hadn't even finished reading it. As I've tried to explain science is advanced by scientists doing research and writing scientific papers that are published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It is a free world and if a reporter manages to get a commisssion to write on a subject in which he has no academic training or expertise then so be it. If people choose to read his book then that is their choice. It is my choice not to read such a book. I prefer to spend my time reading the original scientific papers rather than someone else's misinterpretation of those papers. Other people have already commented on the shortcomings of the book and its lack of scientific rigour, and I merely thought it would be helpful for people to read those reviews if they wanted so that they can perhaps try and understand the scientific viewpoint if they do choose to read the book. These authors have explained the problems with the book far more eloquently than I can. I provided those links for the benefit of all list members and not just Americans. Nationality should have nothing to do with it. The author of the book is after all a Brit. As you will recall, I also provided a link to a scientific paper by Guido Barbujani "Human Races: Classifying People vs Understanding Diversity" which gives a good summary of the current scientific thinking on the subject of "race". I've provided a TinyURL below as the link got broken up by Rootsweb so perhaps people had difficulty accessing the paper: http://tinyurl.com/mvdt487 Perhaps you might like to have a look at this paper with an open mind and let us know what you think. If you know of any scientific papers that offer a different view perhaps you can share them with us. Can I suggest that we focus our discussions on the science and not on emotions. Debbie ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This. Please remove me from this list. > From: knordtvedt@bresnan.net > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 15:27:34 -0600 > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > Debbie, Fortunately you, alone, can't censor the book, so that's not the > issue. The thread began with a one sentence recommendation to read the book > and did not include a review or analysis of the book. > > So your subsequent outburst of miscelaneous slander seems over the top and > rather dark to me at least. But let's hope the brouha will wet the > appetites of some and actually lead to more reading the book. > > I notice that among the folks on the book jacket saying positive things > about their reaction to the book are hard scientists James D Watson and > Edward O Wilson, and even soft scientist Lionel Tiger. > > Author Nicholas Wade was educated at England's Cambridge University in > Natural Science, he was reporter or editor at the well known journals > Science and Nature, and eventually science reporter/editor at the New York > Times. > > So his was a long career of working at the interface of science and the > general wider public with interest in science matters. The book was not > meant to be a "peer reviewed" scientific article, for the little that has > come to mean in today's world. > > > > Kenneth Nordtvedt > > Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: > http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net > > -----Original Message----- > From: Debbie Kennett > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 1:54 PM > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > John > > I am not in the least trying to censor the book. Note that Ken recommended > the book to the list despite admitting that he hadn't even finished reading > it. > > As I've tried to explain science is advanced by scientists doing research > and writing scientific papers that are published in peer-reviewed scientific > journals. It is a free world and if a reporter manages to get a commisssion > to write on a subject in which he has no academic training or expertise then > so be it. If people choose to read his book then that is their choice. It is > my choice not to read such a book. I prefer to spend my time reading the > original scientific papers rather than someone else's misinterpretation of > those papers. > > Other people have already commented on the shortcomings of the book and its > lack of scientific rigour, and I merely thought it would be helpful for > people to read those reviews if they wanted so that they can perhaps try and > understand the scientific viewpoint if they do choose to read the book. > These authors have explained the problems with the book far more eloquently > than I can. I provided those links for the benefit of all list members and > not just Americans. Nationality should have nothing to do with it. The > author of the book is after all a Brit. > > As you will recall, I also provided a link to a scientific paper by Guido > Barbujani "Human Races: Classifying People vs Understanding Diversity" which > gives a good summary of the current scientific thinking on the subject of > "race". I've provided a TinyURL below as the link got broken up by Rootsweb > so perhaps people had difficulty accessing the paper: > > http://tinyurl.com/mvdt487 > > Perhaps you might like to have a look at this paper with an open mind and > let us know what you think. If you know of any scientific papers that offer > a different view perhaps you can share them with us. > > Can I suggest that we focus our discussions on the science and not on > emotions. > > Debbie > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dan Hitler is very relevant to the current debate. Surely you must have studied some European history? Hitler believed that there was such a thing as an Aryan race and that the Aryan race was a master race. Over six million people were methodically slaughtered by the Nazis because of their "race". Is that the world that you would like us to return to? Debbie

You understood my point although English is not my mother tongue. Otherwise ... no comment. Mvh/Regards Nicolas Taban -------- Original message -------- From: Dan Kimel <dankimel@comcast.net> Date:29/06/2014 21:42 (GMT+01:00) To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book My dear distant cousin Nicolas, I address you this way because you are on this forum. But Nicolas, you need some work with your English. I see the quote, "using below waste techniques, " Do you mean waist for waste? So who is using such techniques? Could it be you who totally from out of the blue says that people who are pushing for freedom to read and make independent judgements are pushing Hitler's agenda? Give me a break! Dan On 6/29/2014 3:03 PM, nicolas.taban wrote: > Guys, > > I am sorry to jump in this brito-american debate but I feel from an neutral stand point that this looks like all against Debbie ... becoming all Americans against Debbie ... because she dares going against outrageous affirmations ... which seems to be, her, main stream thinking. > > If you took the time to read her arguments and respond on them instead of using below waste techniques all this would be far more interesting. > > Wake up ... if you want to make historical analogies, more recent in time, this looks pretty much the same arguments than Hitler was pushing forward. Biasing scientifical results to suits own ideology. > Provocation is good to open debates, but it needs to be scientifically argumented. > > I too have been missing the list but I am kind of desapointed, since it came back online: all but 1 (ok may be 2) posts on this thread was more about feelings and suppositions that science and fact. > > So guys stay focused please! > > Mvh/Regards > > Nicolas Taban > > -------- Original message -------- > From: John <jgdb@twcny.rr.com> > Date:29/06/2014 20:18 (GMT+01:00) > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > Debbie, > > On behalf of my fellow Americans I'd like to object to your repeated digs at > our ability to read and make intelligent analysis of controversial subject > matter. Intentionally or not, YOU are presenting a very stereotypical image > of your own nationality. > > Mr. Wades book will have followers and detractors over here no different > than on your side of the pond. Rather than so inelegantly trying to censor > his book, which I believe from your own statement you have not bothered to > read, it might be better for your cause to present well reasoned > counter-points to the assertions he makes in the book. > > John Beardsley > an intelligent, open minded American > > -----Original Message----- > From: Debbie Kennett > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 10:17 AM > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > In Nicholas Wade's feeble attempt to rebut his critics he says "I don't care > what the science may say because I'll never change my position". I think > just about says it all. If he wishes to ignore the scientific evidence to > advance his own personal beliefs then that's entirely his choice. I hadn't > realised he was British. It's perhaps not surprising that he's ended up in > America. He would find much less tolerance of his views over here. > > There's a very good article here by Kenan Malik on why both sides of the > debate are wrong: > > https://kenanmalik.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/why-both-sides-are-wrong-in-the- > race-debate/ > > Debbie > > -----Original Message----- > From: y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Obed W Odom > Sent: 29 June 2014 14:35 > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > I think the review by the NY Times was somewhat more charitable. There seems > to be no question, though, that Wade's book has hit a raw nerve in some > circles of his fellow Brits. > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

"most of which was fueled by the the same type of European arrogance which we still see in the EU." LOL...That's a rather broad statement. Are Europeans somehow more arrogant than Americans or people in other parts of the world? > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 17:33:46 -0400 > From: dankimel@comcast.net > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > On 6/29/2014 5:07 PM, Debbie Kennett wrote: > > Dan > > > > Hitler is very relevant to the current debate. Surely you must have studied > > some European history? Hitler believed that there was such a thing as an > > Aryan race and that the Aryan race was a master race. Over six million > > people were methodically slaughtered by the Nazis because of their "race". > > Is that the world that you would like us to return to? > > > > Debbie > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > Dear Debbie, > > I don't believe I've used the word "race" in any post I've made. Hitler > was a psychopath, whose death marked a end of an era, most of which was > fueled by the the same type of European arrogance which we still see in > the EU. > > Peace. > > Dan > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Guys, I am sorry to jump in this brito-american debate but I feel from an neutral stand point that this looks like all against Debbie ... becoming all Americans against Debbie ... because she dares going against outrageous affirmations ... which seems to be, her, main stream thinking. If you took the time to read her arguments and respond on them instead of using below waste techniques all this would be far more interesting. Wake up ... if you want to make historical analogies, more recent in time, this looks pretty much the same arguments than Hitler was pushing forward. Biasing scientifical results to suits own ideology. Provocation is good to open debates, but it needs to be scientifically argumented. I too have been missing the list but I am kind of desapointed, since it came back online: all but 1 (ok may be 2) posts on this thread was more about feelings and suppositions that science and fact. So guys stay focused please! Mvh/Regards Nicolas Taban -------- Original message -------- From: John <jgdb@twcny.rr.com> Date:29/06/2014 20:18 (GMT+01:00) To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book Debbie, On behalf of my fellow Americans I'd like to object to your repeated digs at our ability to read and make intelligent analysis of controversial subject matter. Intentionally or not, YOU are presenting a very stereotypical image of your own nationality. Mr. Wades book will have followers and detractors over here no different than on your side of the pond. Rather than so inelegantly trying to censor his book, which I believe from your own statement you have not bothered to read, it might be better for your cause to present well reasoned counter-points to the assertions he makes in the book. John Beardsley an intelligent, open minded American -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Kennett Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 10:17 AM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book In Nicholas Wade's feeble attempt to rebut his critics he says "I don't care what the science may say because I'll never change my position". I think just about says it all. If he wishes to ignore the scientific evidence to advance his own personal beliefs then that's entirely his choice. I hadn't realised he was British. It's perhaps not surprising that he's ended up in America. He would find much less tolerance of his views over here. There's a very good article here by Kenan Malik on why both sides of the debate are wrong: https://kenanmalik.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/why-both-sides-are-wrong-in-the- race-debate/ Debbie -----Original Message----- From: y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Obed W Odom Sent: 29 June 2014 14:35 To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book I think the review by the NY Times was somewhat more charitable. There seems to be no question, though, that Wade's book has hit a raw nerve in some circles of his fellow Brits. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dan As you think Nicolas has so much trouble with his English perhaps you can help him by replying to him in his own language. The sense was perfectly clear to me. He can't understand why people are wasting the list's time by making spurious accusations rather than focusing on the evidence and the science. Best wishes Debbie

John I am not in the least trying to censor the book. Note that Ken recommended the book to the list despite admitting that he hadn't even finished reading it. As I've tried to explain science is advanced by scientists doing research and writing scientific papers that are published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It is a free world and if a reporter manages to get a commisssion to write on a subject in which he has no academic training or expertise then so be it. If people choose to read his book then that is their choice. It is my choice not to read such a book. I prefer to spend my time reading the original scientific papers rather than someone else's misinterpretation of those papers. Other people have already commented on the shortcomings of the book and its lack of scientific rigour, and I merely thought it would be helpful for people to read those reviews if they wanted so that they can perhaps try and understand the scientific viewpoint if they do choose to read the book. These authors have explained the problems with the book far more eloquently than I can. I provided those links for the benefit of all list members and not just Americans. Nationality should have nothing to do with it. The author of the book is after all a Brit. As you will recall, I also provided a link to a scientific paper by Guido Barbujani "Human Races: Classifying People vs Understanding Diversity" which gives a good summary of the current scientific thinking on the subject of "race". I've provided a TinyURL below as the link got broken up by Rootsweb so perhaps people had difficulty accessing the paper: http://tinyurl.com/mvdt487 Perhaps you might like to have a look at this paper with an open mind and let us know what you think. If you know of any scientific papers that offer a different view perhaps you can share them with us. Can I suggest that we focus our discussions on the science and not on emotions. Debbie

I haven't read Wade's book, but the more I read about it, the more skeptical I become. Especially after reading the review in American Scientist by Greg Laden, a biological anthropologist: http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/a-troubling-tome/1 For example: [Wade] argues that differences in intellectual capacity between what he calls the three major races are innate, and that those differences can explain disparities between regions in economic and political success. Wade writes that “a part of the world has grown steadily and vastly richer over the last 300 years. This is not an accident or luck, and a reasonable explanation is available in terms of human evolution. . . The explanation is that there has been an evolutionary change in human social behavior that has facilitated the new, posttribal social structure on which modern societies are based.” He catalogs “Jewish adaptations” as primary examples, referring for instance to rates of winning Nobel prizes. In making the argument that such adaptations are genetic, Wade intimates why no other group is like the Jews: “People are highly imitative, and if the Jewish advantage were purely cultural, such as hectoring mothers or a special devotion to education, there would be little to prevent others from copying it.” More likely, he concludes, “the adaptation of Jews to a special cognitive niche . . . represents a striking example of natural selection’s ability to change a human population in just a few centuries.” Or: Wade claims that both chimpanzees and humans “inherited a genetic template” for social behavior from their common ancestor and asks why humans “should ever have lost the genetic template for . . . social behaviors.” But it has not been demonstrated that chimpanzee social behaviors differentiate because of genetics. Chimpanzee subspecies are very different from each other genetically. In 1999 Henrik Kaessmann, Victor Wiebe, and Svante Pääbo reported in Sciencethat “comparison to humans shows the diversity of chimpanzee sequences to be almost four times as high . . . as the corresponding values of humans.” That same year, Richard Warangham, Jane Goodall, and their colleagues published a Nature paper characterizing a great diversity in chimpanzee culture, including 39 distinct behavioral patterns, that could not be sorted out on the basis of subspecies and that were observed to be highly variable within subspecies. In short, chimp genetic variation has not been shown to correlate with cultural variation. Unlike humans, chimpanzees do have true races, but racial differences just don’t explain cultural differences among chimps. Elsewhere, Wade refers problematically to the “nomadic life of hunter- gatherer bands.” Making no reference to actual studies, he uses a broad brush to paint a hunter-gatherer culture unsubstantiated by any recognizable ethnography. His descriptions of how hunter-gatherers deal with social transgressions and interpersonal violence instead recall the writings of 19th century armchair anthropologists. Wade does not appear familiar with the primary and current literature on foragers, and he makes the additional mistake of accepting psychologist Steven Pinker’s mischaracterization of the data on the high rate of violence among hunter-gatherers. The archaeological record shows periods when violence rates spiked in some ancient groups, but skeletal remains from ancient foragers are rare and so the data are sparse. We who study living hunter-gatherers generally have the impression that they are violence averse. There is a good chance that changes in levels of violence in past human societies have been multidirectional and complex. I'm certainly skeptical that genetic differences could have arisen in only a few hundred years that would explain why, for example, western European countries are more economically successful. > Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 15:41:13 -0400 > From: dankimel@comcast.net > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > My dear distant cousin Nicolas, > > I address you this way because you are on this forum. > > But Nicolas, you need some work with your English. I see the quote, > "using below waste techniques, " Do you mean waist for waste? So who > is using such techniques? Could it be you who totally from out of the > blue says that people who are pushing for freedom to read and make > independent judgements are pushing Hitler's agenda? Give me a break! > > Dan > > > > > On 6/29/2014 3:03 PM, nicolas.taban wrote: > > Guys, > > > > I am sorry to jump in this brito-american debate but I feel from an neutral stand point that this looks like all against Debbie ... becoming all Americans against Debbie ... because she dares going against outrageous affirmations ... which seems to be, her, main stream thinking. > > > > If you took the time to read her arguments and respond on them instead of using below waste techniques all this would be far more interesting. > > > > Wake up ... if you want to make historical analogies, more recent in time, this looks pretty much the same arguments than Hitler was pushing forward. Biasing scientifical results to suits own ideology. > > Provocation is good to open debates, but it needs to be scientifically argumented. > > > > I too have been missing the list but I am kind of desapointed, since it came back online: all but 1 (ok may be 2) posts on this thread was more about feelings and suppositions that science and fact. > > > > So guys stay focused please! > > > > Mvh/Regards > > > > Nicolas Taban > > > > -------- Original message -------- > > From: John <jgdb@twcny.rr.com> > > Date:29/06/2014 20:18 (GMT+01:00) > > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > > > Debbie, > > > > On behalf of my fellow Americans I'd like to object to your repeated digs at > > our ability to read and make intelligent analysis of controversial subject > > matter. Intentionally or not, YOU are presenting a very stereotypical image > > of your own nationality. > > > > Mr. Wades book will have followers and detractors over here no different > > than on your side of the pond. Rather than so inelegantly trying to censor > > his book, which I believe from your own statement you have not bothered to > > read, it might be better for your cause to present well reasoned > > counter-points to the assertions he makes in the book. > > > > John Beardsley > > an intelligent, open minded American > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Debbie Kennett > > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 10:17 AM > > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > > > In Nicholas Wade's feeble attempt to rebut his critics he says "I don't care > > what the science may say because I'll never change my position". I think > > just about says it all. If he wishes to ignore the scientific evidence to > > advance his own personal beliefs then that's entirely his choice. I hadn't > > realised he was British. It's perhaps not surprising that he's ended up in > > America. He would find much less tolerance of his views over here. > > > > There's a very good article here by Kenan Malik on why both sides of the > > debate are wrong: > > > > https://kenanmalik.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/why-both-sides-are-wrong-in-the- > > race-debate/ > > > > Debbie > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com > > [mailto:y-dna-haplogroup-i-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Obed W Odom > > Sent: 29 June 2014 14:35 > > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book > > > > I think the review by the NY Times was somewhat more charitable. There seems > > to be no question, though, that Wade's book has hit a raw nerve in some > > circles of his fellow Brits. > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Ken, I think people will read it, and the reaction in certain circles was predictable from the title. I ordered it last night after reading your recommendation. One local library has two copies with seven holds (I think I am number 7) and the other has it on order (I should be first on that list). Some of the best books I have ever read were written by scholars, not for other scholars in their fields but for the educated public. Ivor Noel-Hume, James Horn, and Helen Rountree are three names that come immediately to mind. We need more such books and fewer poorly-written, dull-as-dishwater, full-of-technical-jargon, peer-reviewed publications that even some scholars must cringe to read. Lindsey ****************************** The thread began with a one sentence recommendation to read the book and did not include a review or analysis of the book. So your subsequent outburst of miscelaneous slander seems over the top and rather dark to me at least. But let's hope the brouha will wet the appetites of some and actually lead to more reading the book. I notice that among the folks on the book jacket saying positive things about their reaction to the book are hard scientists James D Watson and Edward O Wilson, and even soft scientist Lionel Tiger. Author Nicholas Wade was educated at England's Cambridge University in Natural Science, he was reporter or editor at the well known journals Science and Nature, and eventually science reporter/editor at the New York Times. So his was a long career of working at the interface of science and the general wider public with interest in science matters. The book was not meant to be a "peer reviewed" scientific article, for the little that has come to mean in today's world

On 6/29/2014 5:53 PM, John M Rhodes wrote: > Poor Dr. Dan. The WHOLE Internet?! Oooops :-( > > "I once thought I made a mistake but I was mistaken." > > John M Rhodes > > On 2014-06-29, at 4:44 PM, Dan Kimel <dankimel@comcast.net> wrote: > >> On 6/29/2014 3:59 PM, Debbie Kennett wrote: >>> Dan >>> >>> As you think Nicolas has so much trouble with his English perhaps you can >>> help him by replying to him in his own language. The sense was perfectly >>> clear to me. He can't understand why people are wasting the list's time by >>> making spurious accusations rather than focusing on the evidence and the >>> science. >>> >>> Best wishes >>> >>> Debbie >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> Dear Debbie, >> >> Damn, but the reply I thought went to you, went to the whole internet >> universe. >> >> Sorry, >> >> Dan >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >