Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-12 > 1166022726

From: "Sasson Margaliot" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Ellen's Paper
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:12:06 +0200
References: <><BAY134-F2175A8A0D61A32937DC464B8D60@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BAY134-F2175A8A0D61A32937DC464B8D60@phx.gbl>

The fact that this paper had induced you to make you own research on
the subject is by itself the best possible proof that it is an
interresting work.

Any serious hypothesis is naturally subject to counterarguments,
especially one challenging traditional assumptions.

Sasson Margaliot

On 12/13/06, Aaron Hill <> wrote:
> I have just started my response to Ellen's paper and am approaching 500
> words already. It will be interesting to see how this thing develops.
> Anyway, nothing against her, but I am not a convert to her theory. In my
> opinion, there are some fatal flaws in her argument. As I get it together, I
> do want people to realize that I am not a scientist. I am just the guy down
> the street who has an opinion. I will have some folks review my math as this
> one of my many weaknesses.
> Aaron
> _________________________________________________________________
> All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day trial!
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

This thread: