scary).
--------------
Ian Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
www.BloodSource.org
Sacramento, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: Deanna Schneider [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 1:17 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Generational Math
Hm...a website devoted to kissing cousins....kinda spooky.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Skinner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 3:05 PM
Subject: RE: Generational Math
> Just to stir the pot, 5th cousins are not incest by any measurement I've
> ever heard of. You can actually legally marry your 1st cousin in the US.
> Interestingly, you can only do the ceremony in approximately 1/2 the
states,
> the rest requiring at lest a 2nd Cousin's separation or more. But since a
> marriage preformed in any state is legal in all states, does this really
> matter?
>
>
> http://www.cousincouples.com/index.shtml?./pages/states.htm
<http://www.cousincouples.com/index.shtml?./pages/states.htm>
> <http://www.cousincouples.com/index.shtml?./pages/states.htm>
>
> --------------
> Ian Skinner
> Web Programmer
> BloodSource
> www.BloodSource.org
> Sacramento, CA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Small [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 1:04 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Generational Math
>
>
> I gotta tell ya...
> My family has been in this area for a long time (South Carolina - Myrtle
> Beach, Conway), and we have many kinships over the place. I haven't lived
> here all of my life, but my father was born and raised here. He knows
many
> more familial realtionships in the area than I do.
>
> Over the past 8 years, as I got out of the USMC and was in college, I
would
> occasionally run into my father when I was with a girl I was interested
in.
> They were usually local girls, from the area that my grandmother lived
> because that's where my college is. My father would immediately start the
> girl asking what her name was, who she's related to, does she know this
> person, etc. Invariably they would settle on some obscure person that
they
> both knew of but hadn't seen in 2.3 million years, and my father just sure
> that this girl was a fifth cousin or some crap like that.
>
> <sigh> Like we need incest in South Carolina. </sigh>
>
> - Matt Small
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ian Skinner
> To: CF-Community
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 3:44 PM
> Subject: RE: Generational Math
>
> Depends on how you look at it. First of all, yes the farther you go
back,
> the more "cousin" loving you get. It doesn't take that far at really,
> just
> go back 2 or 3 centuries, you would get relatively small populations
with
> little geographical movement, you would most likely be marrying a cousin
> of
> some sort. Now, once you get past the 2nd cousin level, it's really not
> that big a deal.
>
> If fact, that was the first purpose of genealogy, to make sure that the
> person one was marrying was not too closely related to oneself.
>
> The other way to look at it, is to do the math forward. Take a person
who
> lived 1500 years ago, and assume he had on average, 2 surviving
> descendants
> each generation (a fairly conservative number I believe) and you get
> 562,949,953,421,312 descendants in the current generation. Obviously
> considerably more then the number of people currently alive. It
basically
> means that anybody you marry now, must be a cousin of some level.
> Especially if you stay within your own ethnic/geographical area (reduces
> the
> number of choices considerably).
>
> So in reality, we all are engaged in cousin loving everyday.
>
> --------------
> Ian Skinner
> Web Programmer
> BloodSource
> www.BloodSource.org
> Sacramento, CA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 12:34 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Generational Math
>
> So there must have been a ton of interfamily breeding back in the day,
> especially when you take into account populational bottlenecks due to
> natural disasters and global epidemics. Wow. I never thought of it, but
> there must have been alot, I mean ALOT of cousin lovin going on.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Skinner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 3:29 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Generational Math
>
> You are correct, if you go back far enough we are all related to one
> another
> one way or another. What will happen is that the farther back you go,
you
> will conceivable have that same ancestor appearing in two or more lines.
> A
> simple example, that does happen. If you have a pair of second cousins
> who
> marry, they would share a common set of great-grandparents. So instead
of
> having 4 sets of great-grandparents (8 people) they would only have 3
> distinct sets (6 people).
>
> What would happen is the percentage of this relationship sharing would
> grow
> the farther back you go.
>
> --------------
> Ian Skinner
> Web Programmer
> BloodSource
> www.BloodSource.org
> Sacramento, CA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Stanley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 12:08 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Generational Math
>
> Okay doing family history research which by the way can be seen at
> http://www.netconceptions.com <http://www.netconceptions.com>
<http://www.netconceptions.com>
> <http://www.netconceptions.com>
> <http://www.netconceptions.com>
> <http://www.netconceptions.com>
> <http://www.netconceptions.com> , and stating
> to see something odd. I know that the number of ancestors a person has
for
> a
> particular generation doubles from the previous generation's number. So
at
> the 4th generation back from me I have 8, and the 5th I have 16 and so
on.
> Which leads to this. You can tell the number of ancestors you have for a
> generation by taking 2 to the (generation number minus one) power.
>
> This is all fine and dandy, but after a certain point it becomes more
and
> more improbable that say after 49 generations which is about 1500 years
I
> would have 562,949,953,421,312 ancestors in that generation.
>
> So what gives. Is the math suspect? Is there an inbreeding curve? Even
if
> you account for like 50% cross-ancestral breeding, that still leaves a
> huge
> number of people anyone is descended from going back that far. This must
> take into account the number of people on earth for the whole
generational
> period in question.
>
> Anyone?
>
> John
> _____
> _____
> _____
> _____
>
>
>
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
