GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2009-12 > 1260390015


From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] R-U152 and R-L21 on the European Continent
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:20:15 -0500
References: <mailman.279.1260259242.26095.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com><A93225B377724B83BF5250F368878955@anatoldesktop><ea3bd9560912080855u5f4216a1g4d0b6a16d543dae1@mail.gmail.com><REME20091209002724@alum.mit.edu><ea3bd9560912082206r79afe90ubf5cf4f7ca9774fb@mail.gmail.com><REME20091209015633@alum.mit.edu><ea3bd9560912091050x269ed21j66e8bb05570c7db1@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ea3bd9560912091050x269ed21j66e8bb05570c7db1@mail.gmail.com>(message from David Faux on Wed, 9 Dec 2009 10:50:41 -0800)


David wrote:

> The truth is we don't know.

If you insist on taking the obscurantist route, that also means you
cannot "sit on the fence" after all. To be rigorous, you must reject
all forms of extrapolation in age calculation. For example, you must
reject outright the application of fudge factors to dates that go
thousands of years into the past. For that matter, you cannot
seriously accept the concept of averaging fudge factors from separate
populations to get a "more reliable" result to be extended to other,
uncalibrated populations. "The truth is we don't know."

John Chandler


This thread: