GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2009-12 > 1260415621


From: Vincent Vizachero <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] R-U152 and R-L21 on the European Continent
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 21:29:03 -0600
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><REME20091209151913@alum.mit.edu><ea3bd9560912091230n1db9cfdfp2b6f08d58809c9c6@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ea3bd9560912091230n1db9cfdfp2b6f08d58809c9c6@mail.gmail.com>


The problem, David, is that ZUF appear to have taken a step in the
WRONG direction. Instead of identifying the many different factors
that might affect the translation of intraclade variance into a TMRCA
estimate, they instead took the approach of throwing all the factors
into a blender and concocting a mess.

Of all the papers I've seen published, the ZUF papers have done more
harm to the field than any others.

VV


On Dec 9, 2009, at 2:30 PM, David Faux wrote:

> I applaud ZUF for taking a step in
> what would seem to be the right direction.


This thread: