Dear Steve,
First, let me address your combining me with Jack. Please do not do so I have never met
the man nor as far as I know ever corresponded with him, here or anywhere else, except for
this correspondence.
Second how dare you insinuate I’m not a good through paper genealogist. I have been
working on proving / disproving via actual documentation, what others have copied ver
batem as factual with out questioning it, for over 12 years. Because I have taken on
proving the facts of my parental ancestry, I have found the errors propagated by others
who did not take the time to do the research. I have proven through YDNA Studies that not
all Gilpins are related.
#1. As I said…I only have this input. When you have a debate as to whom is related to
whom; YDNA is the only answer. It will not tell you how you are related but it will tell
if you are related. It will also disprove any assumed relationship.
THAT HAS BEEN MY COMPLETE POINT!
Your:
Which leads to the only question (you can even call it a hypothetical question, if you
want to) that I wish you and Nelda (separately) to respond to; If called under oath to
answer yes or no, is the following statement true or false?:
“If a son of Daniel, in Scotland, including an illegitimate son, or a son of Daniel's
son, Daniel Jr, were to have gone to Wales in the period between 1630-1650 or later, and
took up a family of his own, which family eventually left Wales for the new world, in the
early 1700's, would they have the same DNA as Daniel?”
ANSWER: YES, That is what I said in my #1 above. To add to this You could go back another
20 generations or even more and the Ydna will match or be close in its results to other
men who descend from a common ancestor.
YOUR “No double talk, no hum and haw; no genealogy clattering, just YES or NO. I'm
sure you will evade the question, because it would shoot down your "hoax and
fictional myth" theory that you are want to hold on to.”
QUESTION: What hoax and fictional myth theory that I am want to hold on to.???
I stated fact “YDNA will prove or disprove a relationship.” If you had read my website:
http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~bonsteinandgilpin/
You would have seen
“It is important not to wrongly over-rate or under-rate the value of DNA testing for
genealogical research. Unrealistic expectations that solutions to long-standing
genealogical mysteries will simply come flowing back from laboratories on the first day
lead surprisingly often to very interesting leads being forgotten or not noticed, and in
many cases it even leads to people feeling that DNA testing is a waste of time - which can
effectively put a stop on a whole project. Put simply, while surprises do happen, and
while it is undoubtedly true that most projects have only small databases so far,
******one of the most important things to remember is that DNA studies normally require
quite a bit of old style research in order to come up with good hypothesis and good
confirming evidence.”
YOUR: “On the other hand, if you answer yes, then there is your possible answer as to why
the descendants of Richard, son of Isaac, would match Daniel's DNA. In your answer to
me, you stated, "Coincidentally, Daniel Jr is known to have had many children that
are not yet identified ...". In 60 years or so, it is not only possible but perhaps
totally consistent with the time for a son to have gone to Wales, fathered a son named
Isaac, who fathered Richard, Elisha, and possibly others, who came to America
independently from Daniel's other direct lineage. “
ANSWER: TO REINERATE….. A YDNA HAPLOTYPE (The results of a Ydna test) can be the same for
hundreds of generations… YES thousands of years, so even Richard’s (mentioned above) great
great great great grandfather’s descendant could have gone to Wales and that person’s
descendants could have gone to where ever in America, and yes if they were tested their
Ydna results should be a close match, possibly even 5 step away, but still a close
relationship.
Now, to address other points of your email that included me…
YOUR: I'm sharing a response with another subscriber, and out of the blue, here comes
Nelda Percival trying to sell me some magic pill she is hustling.
ANSWER:
FIRST TO HUSTLE I MUST BE RECEIVING SOME MONUMENTAL VALUE… How would I receive anything of
value ? Even as the project manager of the Gilpin surname project I receive no kick back…
I truly was trying to show you both how you could settle your differences… test these
Robbins descendants. If they proved to be related then you could spend your time trying to
figure out how they were related … If they were not related you both could drop it…
Yours truly,
Now his latest response to my response says he is put off by my sarcasm. Then his buddy
Nelda jumps back in and compliments his insightful reasoning, and tries to sell her magic
pills again, which have now gone on sale for the holidays.
Yes, I did try to be helpful in indicating “all the different DNA companies” are dropping
the pricing for the Holidays… WE discuss it on the rootsweb.com’s Genealogy-DNA mailing
list.
YOUR: How many readers will not post messages if they are guaranteed to have their
integrity attacked and now I suppose I'm on some DNA magic pill mailing list forever.
But the real issues are these:
ANSWER: Your right about readers not posting because they will be jumped on…. Just like
you have jumped all over me…. And no… as far as I know there is no DNA Magic pill mailing
list…
YOUR:
Sir and Madam; My sarcasm is due to one thing only. The arrogance of the DNA scientific,
revisionist-history, magic pill crowd. Just because some distant relative of Richard
Robbins is DNA-related to Daniel Robbins from Scotland doesn't mean that there was no
Isaac Robbins from Wales and that Richard did not come from Wales. There are perfectly
logical explanations for them to both be real and correct. I'll address that in a few
moments.
ANSWER
YOU really should have read my website before you sarcastically accuse me of arrogance….
God… I’ll make sure I never stick my two cents into any email message that you ever write…
You don’t seem able to separate me from Jack…I never questioned who was whom or who was
related to whom…
I said people have a tendency to copy with out question other people’s research. That is
not good genealogy. You must source your proof so that others can go to the source and
read the proof for themselves. You need to know the difference between primary and
secondary documentation. So that you insure the poinderance of evidence supports your
hypotheses.
Your:
No, cops leave the real investigations for people who are not close-minded and who seek
long and hard for all of the evidence, that which proves or disproves the apparent facts
with equal importance. After exhausting all leads, only then do they declare their
findings as fact, fiction, fraud or myth. Often the "two sides to every story"
are equally right, and sometimes science leads investigators to disregard other possible
theories to the crime.
QUESTION: Are you calling me close-minded? A good genealogist does the same. They do not
take some other person’s research unless it has good proof…. Proof that can be proven by
others and find the same results. No in good genealogy you take others findings and
double-check them to insure an error was not made….
YOUR: I strongly support the DNA project as a tool, but no more than one tool, to research
the family lines. You, Oprah, and Jerry Springer are treating DNA as a magic pill that
takes away the need for research. "Buy now, while itis on sale, and we'll tell
you what famous person you are related to". The DNA project is not a non-stop
shortcut to genealogy, but you treat it as the final, undisputable proof fo something,
which it is NOT. The proof of one thing doesn't necessarily mean the disproof of all
else.
ANSWER: I have answered the first part a couple of times already… no Ydna must be
supported by good genealogical research THAT IS WHY IT IS CALLED GENETIC GENEALOGY and not
just Genetics….
But Proof…. YDNA if the test is done correctly is absolute proof of a relationship. Nobody
said it disproved anything else…. WE ALL KNOW IT DOES NOT SAY WHO YOU ARE RELAED TO JUST
THAT YOU ARE RELATED IN A PATERNAL LINEAGE.
YOUR:To prove his point, Nelda jumps in and quotes a person named Gilpin or something like
that, who perpetuated a fraud about a coat of arms back in the 1500's. Therefore,
Nelda says, all research should be suspected of being a fraud, so go directly to the
microscope view of genealogy, which is conveniently on sale now. "But wait,
that's not all. If you're one of the first 50 callers, we'll throw in
..."
How patently arrogant. No true genealogical researcher I have ever met would stoop to such
a thing. I hope you would not do such a thing, John.
“so go directly to the microscope view of genealogy, which is conveniently on sale now.
"But wait, that's not all. If you're one of the first 50 callers, we'll
throw in ..." “
Gilpin is my paternal lineage and yes there was incorrect information others have been
sharing because no one took the time to check the documents or facts behind that
information and yes I used it as an example just like you used your personal opinions and
experience of being with the Police Department. I’m wrong for doing that but your not??!!
If I was touting a DNA Company I’d be telling you to use the company I think is the best
instead I pointed out that even dna companies run specials during the holidays.
Now believe me this is my very last correspondence to you about any subject!
Regards
Nelda L. Percival nee GilpinA Robbins relative via my maternal lineage