Re a a scientific theory that contradicts their interpretations of religious scriptures: I assume you're talking about evolution, dinosaur fossils, Monkees -oops I mean monkeys- , the earth moving around the sun, and all that crazy talk. But I've been wondering: Which paternal haplogroup did Noah & his 3 sons belong to? Skimming through Genesis so far I've seen about 5 references to Noah, his wife, his 3 sons & their wives, but no daughters, and certainly no daughters' husbands on the Ark. Talk about your major bottleneck... What mutation rate is required to reach the current level of diversity starting from zero at Mt Ararat? Richard Thrift ---- dnalister@comcast.net wrote: I have another reason - religious objections. Some people will object to testing because it is based on a scientific theory that contradicts their interpretations of religious scriptures. I'm not really sure, but I think this may be what a cousin of mine was referring to yesterday when he talked about "his beliefs" as a reason for declining to test. :-( I decided not to press the issue, since it was pretty clear that the answer for that day was no, and I think it will remain no, but I can hope that he will change his mind, and I think people are more likely to change their mind when given some time and space to reflect than when they are hounded. If I succeed in getting this line tested, it may be through some other relative. In this case, the other possible testers are closely related to him, so I probably would not be helping my case by coming on too strong with him, and I don't think that would be the right way to treat him anyway. I was disappointed at the outcome in this case, because when I talked to him once before, I thought he sounded willing. Sometimes I like to mention what is for many genealogists a fringe benefit of testing, learning about the ancient history of one's line. Some people won't consider that a benefit. Kirsten ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ralph Taylor" <rt-sails@comcast.net> To: y-dna-projects@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 7:47:32 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [Y-DNA-projects] Reasons for not testing Thank you, Diana, for cataloguing (in the "Roll Call" thread) four reasons for people not getting genetic genealogy tests. It's an important topic. In sales terms, we'd call these objections to be overcome. 1. COST: The economy's had an effect. However, even before it turned awful, I was hearing from folks who "couldn't afford" a few dollars to order a copy of an important paper record. I suspect a longer-lasting reason is that genealogy is a hobby, to be paid for out of shrinking disposable income. Further, our "target audience" is largely seniors, many on fixed incomes. If paying for DNA testing leads to more records to be ordered, its cost seems high. To overcome the objection, we could ask, "How much do you want to know? You've invested a great deal of time, effort and money (Think Ancestry.com subscriptions and courthouse or FHL visits.) to reach this point. Do you want to see the payoff of that investment?" 2. FEAR of ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES: a. LEGAL: There may be concern about use in criminal prosecution or paternity. However, this may be more serious in the abstract than in the reality. Somehow, I doubt that fugitives from justice are great partakers in family history. As Diana pointed out, genetic genealogy markers are not CODIS markers for forensic use and are not accepted in courts of law -- intentionally so. They do not uniquely identify an individual, merely the ancestral line. b: MEDICAL & EMPLOYMENT: Some may be concerned about their insurance companies or employers learning that their results reveal formerly hidden health problems. Diana also pointed out a law (described at http://www.genome.gov/24519851) protects against misuse of the information and, in any case, the tests are (mostly) designed to avoid medical implications. 3. PRIVACY: Few genealogists are inclined to post pictures of their naked selves behaving badly on Facebook pages or to tweet about their dog's breakfast. Maintaining a degree of privacy in this "tell all, show all" world is a concern for many. OOTH, few are "living off the grid" completely. Most try to strike a balance between privacy & disclosure. Though that balance varies from one person to another, it is up to us project admins to assure members that we respect their privacy rights and will honor them to the best of our abilities. 4. NPE DISCOVERY: NPEs (non-parental events) are perhaps the most sensitive issue we deal with. One DNA test could upset a carefully-constructed pedigree. For centuries, genealogies have been faked to prove royal (even holy) descent; some apparently want to maintain the tradition. Overcoming this fear won't be easy. The hard question is "Do you want to propagate a lie or know the truth?" Some will opt for the truth; some will opt not to know. OOTH, some already suspect a NPE and are relieved to find it confirmed. (Jefferson/Hemings comes to mind.) One of our members complained she had no matches and, at the same time, suggested a NPE; checking her FTDNA page, we found she had restricted matches to the project. Removing the restriction revealed 25 matches, most with the surname she'd indicated for the NPE. Let me add two more possible objections to Diana's list: 5. CONFUSION: Genetic genealogy is confusing; unintelligible numeric results are only the beginning of a complex journey. Adding to the confusion, the method may have been oversold in its early days, leading prospective members to distrust us advocates. When confusion or distrust come in, inaction is the most likely result. To overcome this, we must be candid with our prospective members and explain (as simply as we know how) what is involved, what we can help with and what they must do themselves. It may take many iterations, until we strike the chord that resonates with the individual. 6. LACK OF MOTIVATION: Many calling themselves "genealogists" are (in truth) "name collectors"; they see a name and add it to their tree, without regard to sources or evidence. With the Taylor surname, every 3rd new "genealogist" is "related" to President Zachary Taylor (who, BTW, has no living direct male descendants). They are not interested in genetic genealogy because they are not interested in real genealogy. I fear that this objection can not be easily overcome. One can not supply motivation where it does not exist. The best we can do is to nourish the motivation the person may already have. We probably still don't have an exhaustive list. -rt_/) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-PROJECTS-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-PROJECTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message