frauenfelder at June 13th, 2014 14:21 — #1
waetherman at June 13th, 2014 14:41 — #2
You know what would be more interesting than hearing this guy go on about his family tree? Actually getting those "MIT researchers" to talk about the spread of disease, migration patterns, and other actually interesting things about mapping genealogies on a massive scale.
I really am sick of TED.
nickyg at June 13th, 2014 15:06 — #3
What does that make them...?
thaumatechnicia at June 13th, 2014 17:36 — #4
His aunt's fifth great aunt's husband's father's wife's 7th great nephew works out to his sixth great aunt's mother-in-law's 7th great nephew. The relationship is much clearer now!
/come from a largish clan.
//French Canadians, eh...
crenquis at June 13th, 2014 17:55 — #5
(mom's maternal side is French Canadian)
prestonsturges at June 13th, 2014 18:37 — #6
nickyg at June 13th, 2014 22:25 — #7
heheheheheheh... such a classic.
We've been jammed!
Are you CHICKEN, Colonel Sanders?
That's the combination to my luggage.
prestonsturges at June 14th, 2014 02:10 — #8
Spaceballs is holding up pretty well. It's still funny.
chgoliz at June 14th, 2014 10:34 — #9
Non, monsieur....French Canadian family lines go like this:
We're 4th cousins twice removed on the Lalonde side; 5th cousins once removed on the Landry side; 6th cousins on the Melacon side; 2nd cousins 5 times removed on the Terriot side; 3rd cousins 5 times removed on the Dugas side; and 7th cousins once removed on the Pelletret side. And I've probably missed a few.
chgoliz at June 14th, 2014 10:35 — #10
crenquis at June 14th, 2014 16:26 — #11
I shall henceforth read your user name as cousin Liz
(Cousin hidalgo liz)
karls at June 14th, 2014 16:42 — #12
I have really only dabbled in Genealogy, but what is a bit unfortunate about this feel-good talk is that it encourages the worst forms of junk genealogy.
chgoliz at June 14th, 2014 19:28 — #13
chgoliz at June 14th, 2014 19:38 — #14
What I've found is that people come to it in a state worse than ignorance: they think they know, but it's almost entirely wrong.
But it is possible, as a reasonably intelligent non-scientist, to follow the research and learn enough to have a decent understanding about what's going on.
In AJ Jacobs' case, most of his matches are going to be much further back than it seems because Ashkenazis are an endogamous population (inbred). So are French Canadians, Mennonites, Amish, small island populations, etc. This is why he has so many matches. Most are probably estimated as "3rd-distant cousin", although the designation would more realistically be something like 6th-10th cousin, and without proper record keeping (which there isn't for Ashkenazis) there is absolutely no way to ever find the common ancestor. So he can call them all cousin, but he can't prove it despite the DNA segment matches.
othermichael at June 14th, 2014 23:17 — #15
Whenever I hear of "TED talks" I release the safety catch of my Browning.
frauenfelder at June 18th, 2014 14:21 — #16
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.