I strongly disagree with this statement by Charani. DNA is not a "fad" or "craze." It is science, and while traditional genealogical research is needed to back up its findings, it can prove relationships where the other sometimes cannot. Let me give an example: In November I found out that my great-grandmother's father died three years - not three months as we had always been told - before she was born. So clearly, he was not her father! Because I was able to map my mother's chromosomes so as to identify the segments she had received from her grandmother through her grandmother's mother, I was able ot identify those segments which had come from the unknown great-grandfather. A network of close matches on those segments proved the identity of my great-grandmother's father. This could never have been achieved using traditional methods. Although there was a longstanding relationship between the families of my great-grandmother's parents, and although the father was recently widowed (like my great-grandmother's mother) at the time of her conception and living in the next county, none of this information would have been known to us unless the DNA had led us to him. This is just one of several examples in which DNA has helped me break down brick walls and confirm relationships.
Barton On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 08:16 AM, Charani wrote: > On 16/03/2015 14:19, adam allan wrote: >> Was wondering if this testing using DNA is a valuable tool. >> Ancestry.com is offering it and wanted some opinions on the >> technology, tks. > > I'm going to buck the trend because as far as I'm concerned, DNA > testing is a waste of time and money. To me, it's just a gimmick and > the latest craze. It's not going to "prove" anything I don't already > know and I'd be very sceptical about any alleged results. I'd rather > spend the money of a test on a sub to The Genealogist. > > If DNA test results were the only "proof" of a supposed connection to > a family I've never heard of before and to whom I can find no other > connection, I would definitely NOT accept it as evidence of a family > link. > > DNA is not infallible evidence. > > -- > Charani (UK) > OPC for Walton, Ashcott, Shapwick, > Greinton and Clutton, SOM > http://wsom-opc.org.uk > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ > > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ > > Online technical support: http://support.legacyfamilytree.com > > Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) > and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). > > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://support.legacyfamilytree.com Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
