Just so you folks know, since this is going in the direction of DNA, I'm going in for surgery on the 24th and I'm trying to get a great many things done between now and then, so in a nutshell, I'm not following these posts. So if you're thinking I'm paying attention right now, I'm not and I'm not going to be for awhile:) If you have a specific question for me after your discussions, ask me directly and I'll answer as soon as I can after the surgery. Sorry. Bobbi -----Original Message----- From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of L S Y Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 11:34 PM To: younger@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records I was worried I might have to clarify that post a little. The descendancy I listed is for the current DNA participants, not for me. Mine looks like this: 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) --3.William Younger (b.1744) ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) ----5.Armistead Younger (b.1811) -----6.Robert Albert Younger (b.1853) ------7.Charles Edward Younger (b.1881) -------8.Richard Younger (b.1813) --------9.My Father ---------10.Me I am descended from James Samuel (through his son, Wilson Leonard), but the link is my great-grandmother, Rutha Viola, so the DNA chain is broken for me in that direction. - Stephen On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Mark Younger <Mark.Younger@hilton.com>wrote: > Your James Samuel was my John W brother so we should match - both sons > of William and Pricilla ... So you have not had your DNA tested? You and Bob? > > Mark Younger CFM > Director Facilities Administration > Hilton Hotels Corporation > Memphis Operations/Data Center > 755 Crossover Lane > Memphis ,TN 38117 > Tel: 901 374-5458 > Fax :901 374-5458 > > "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" > > -----Original Message----- > From: younger-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:younger-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of L S Y > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 2:37 PM > To: younger@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [YOUNGER] Source Records > > "The DNA from the Armistead line is flawed." > My wife's family would probably agree with you there (I write this > while sitting on my Father-In-Law's couch). That aside though, I > didn't know there were any participants from Armistead's line yet. > Bob and I are the only list members that I am aware of that are direct > male descendants of > Armistead: both of us through sons of his son, Robert Albert. I keep > toying with the idea, but I just can't justify the expense (especially > now that the question of Thomas' relationship to Alexander has been > adequately proven). > > Below is the descendancy from Alexander as I extrapolated it from the > FTDNA > site: > 1.Alexander Younger (b.1681) > -2.Thomas Younger (b.1707) > --3.William Younger (b.1744) > ---4.Williamson Younger (b.1782) > ----5.William Younger (b.1803) > -----6.James Samuel Younger (b.1831) > ------7.James Henry Younger (b.1866) > -------8.William Stanley Younger (b.1895) --------9.Participant #92740 > DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1784) > ----5.Josephus Younger (b.1821) > -----6.Josephus W. Younger (b.1856) > ------7.Stanley E. Younger (b.1896) > -------8.Participant's Father > --------9.Participant #81432 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > -2.James Younger (b.1720) > --3.Thomas *James* Younger (b.1761) > ---4.Thomas Younger (b.1790) > ----5.William Alexander Younger (b.1828) -----6.John Willis Younger > (b.1869) ------7.Claude Elmer Elzy Younger (b.1900) > -------8.Participant #86386 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > ---4.Joseph Younger (b.1803) > ----5.William Green Younger (b.1839) > -----6.Earle Younger (b.1876) > ------7.Merwin Younger (b.1900) > -------8.Participant #N32738 DNA:14,24,14,08,11,13,12,12,12,14,13,30 > > - Stephen > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to YOUNGER-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message