From: pfjames2002@gmail.com   
      
   MB  wrote:   
      
   > On 22/04/2019 00:58, Steve Hayes wrote:   
   > > That is the thing that DNA is most useful for -- DISproving a   
   > > relationship. But the further back you go, the less relable it is   
   > > likely to be. You can't go round exhuming old bodies just to discover   
   > > whether you are or are not related to them, and how do you know that   
   > > the body under the stone is the one whose name is on the stone anyway?   
   >   
   > A negative match can be useful.  We always suspected one person born in   
   > the early 19th Century was illegitimate.  Not fairly certain this is   
   > true because he no DNA relationship to people descended from his   
   > "father" but is related to others through his mother.   
   >   
   > One of the reasons that I did the test was that there are many people   
   > with my surname in Cumberland and always wondered whether we are linked   
   > to them.  Unfortunately not found any on the various DNA sites.  Most   
   > with the name tend to be Americans claiming descent from a 17th Century   
   > immigrant to the USA - they never seem to be descended from a humble   
   > person who went there in the 19th Century!   
   Someone once observed that the ship the "Mayflower" had a tonnage of   
   20,000 tons burthen with a passenger list of 2,000.  This would be to   
   accomadate all of the later 20th centuary claims of descent from a   
   passenger on board.   
   PeteFJ   
      
   --   
   -   
   The address header is false.   
   To contact me email me at: peterATpfjamesDOTcoDOTuk   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)