Without going through the technical language of DNA testing, I generally endorse Cliff’s
comments about the rank-ordering of available tests for genealogical purposes. Y DNA
yields by far the most useful results and FTDNA is currently the largest, and most
conscientious, provider. Ancestry’s autosomal testing (and FTDNA’s as well) has little
relevance to direct genealogy and usually yields a great many people whose surnames mean
nothing because, for instance, they are derived from female siblings of your ancestors
whose married names you never found (or any of their descendants). When you do get
surname hits you haven’t made before, the “relatives" are most likely related to
siblings of your ancestors whose lines are of only marginal interest. MtDNA can be
vaguely interesting but, if anything, of even less direct value, because, unless you are a
royal family, you lose track of your maternal ancestors' surnames about 4 levels in.
Cliff should have added that 23andMe actually bundles a form of yDNA testing with
autosomal and MtDNA testing in it’s “ancestry” test. It’s the only one that bundles them
all and represents good value for beginners. All this is from experience; I have tested
at Y DNA to the highest levels and have tested at 23andMe for both ancestry and health.
My results have been extraordinarily successful.
Jack Fallin
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:42:42 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Cliff. Johnston" <texasfalconer(a)att.net>
To: "fermanagh-gold(a)rootsweb.com" <fermanagh-gold(a)rootsweb.com>
Subject: Re: FERMANAGH-GOLD DNA advice from Lost Cousins
Message-ID: <1592182806.2522765.1511800962941(a)mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I've been doing genealogy research since 1979.? Since 2005 I have used Y-DNA, etc. to
supplement traditional genealogy - took a lot of crap too from die-hard genealogists, some
of it borderline abusive,?but it has paid off.? We Johnstons of I-M223?now have over 80
Y-DNA Cousins connected in our data base.?This?year has seen?us make 2 significant
discoveries: 1)?We have identified the haplogroup of our ancient Clan Johnstoun Chiefs as
I-M223, and,2)?We have identified the?genetic line of the Johnston of Gretna and
Newbie?family, more specifically the line of John Johnston of Newbie.We would never had
done this using autosomal DNA testing - not in a million years.
One needs to be very careful about advertising "puffery".? While Ancestry
claims to have the largest DNA data base in the world, one needs to look a wee bit deeper
into this claim as most of the DNA data?is autosomal which is of very limited use and
value to most.? Slick advertising has made Ancestry millions almost overnight?from
autosomal testing.? Before that they were struggling, buying multiple genealogy related
companies, taking whatever good they had?and then shutting them down?or selling them.?
The most valuable DNA tests continue to be Y-DNA and mtDNA.? Ancestry tried to compete
with FTDNA and others in these fields and failed miserably, leaving thousands of customers
holding the stick with basically useless information in many cases - I'm working with
one such Johnston right now.? Ancestry stiffed him, but good.? Needless to say, I am not a
big fan of Ancestry.?
In conclusion while Ancestry may have the largest data base of autosomal DNA tests, they
are of limited or minimal value to most genealogists.? I know, we all have seen people who
got luck and found a long lost relative, but these are in the minority.? Autosomal DNA
testing is a good parlor game at best.? When it comes to the largest data base of USEFUL
DNA then FTDNA certainly is the leader in this field.? Granted, FTDNA does mot have the
fanciest advertising, nor do they do a lost of slick promotions, but when it comes down to
serious DNA study and the best support services then it is FTDNA all the way.?
Now I shall get off my soapbox...lol...I just don't like to see people waste their
money...but at less than $60 it's fun, just don't take it too seriously.? I've
seen 2 sisters take the same test with Ancestry and been off by 40% in their ethnicity
evaluations, so it's more carnival barking than solid science.
Good hunting,
Cliff.
On Monday, November 27, 2017 8:40 AM, Viola Wiggins <vmaw3434(a)gmail.com> wrote:
