GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-11 > 1069176714
From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Z.Rosser et al,2000, Hg2
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:31:54 -0800 (PST)
I say Alan, no need to get nasty. People can click on the link you have provided, refer to Table 1, and come to their own conclusions. Actually, I agree that I have not made proper use of the word "clinal" and you are absolutely right, it could conceivably cause some confusion.
Perhaps this would be a more precise way of expressing things: According to the findings pertaining to the 47 populations in relation to HG2 ("I"), the highest percentages are seen east of Germany, however there is substantial variability such that in three groups of Uralic speakers from Eastern Europe, the Saami, Finnish, and Mari, the respective percentages of "I" are 31, 23, and 4. This is what is interesting about "I" compared to the two other major groupings is this variability in adjacent groups.
I keep wondering when I am going to see anyone with an "I" haplogroup in my Shetland Project. Three studies of nearby Orkney (with an almost identical history) report "I" hovering around the 8% mark. Considering that Scottish sample in the Rosser study is 12%, and Norwegian 33%, then it becomes very interesting to explain why two areas settled by peoples from these two countries should have values below either (founder effect?). I hope that my reputation remains intact - especially since until now no one has ever called to question same. BTW, perhaps it is a cultural thing, but in North America it is considered bad form to impune a person's reputation in a public forum. It is my reputation that adds weight or credibility to the opinions I provide in Court.
Alan Derriscott <> wrote:
Dear David Faux
Your continued refusal to accept the Hg2 findings of Z.Rosser et al, 2000,
does not enhance your reputation.
You are aware that this major scientific paper was authored by 63 top
notch human geneticists, including Zoe Rosser, Bryan Sykes, Mark Jobling,
Chris Tyler-Smith and Lutz Roewer,
LIST members please see :-
The enlarged prints of Fig.3 and Fig.4, leave no doubt that you are hopelessly
incorrect, and worse, you are not doing justice to our tyro LIST members by
denying the facts of Hg2 as set out in the scientific paper.
Best wishes, Alan.
Wallasey, Wirral, England,
Dr. David K. Faux, P.O. Box 192, Seal Beach, CA, 90740, USA
|Re: [DNA] Z.Rosser et al,2000, Hg2 by David Faux <>|