Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
smartcooky said:
Yeah, but its junk science when TBD wants it to be.

The reality is something different. Since Warren first made her claim in 2012, six years have past - an eternity in the biosciences. The advances in DNA testing and sequencing have been nothing short of dramatic. TDB is way behind the times (and remember, he is a dedicated believer in a magical sky deity, so science is the enemy anyway).
Click to expand...

https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...esting-is-an-inexact-science-task-force-says/

And the flaws pointed out in this article are present in warren's study because there is no NA data from the USA, as pointed out.

Oh man, sound like science!

/good to see the marriage of racism and anti-religious bigotry in a single post tho. :rolleyes:
 
Hellbound said:
You may get an invitation.

I might even let you command some of my LTLPsTM (Laser-Targeted Land Piranha)
Click to expand...

It's like that point when realize that, at least here in the states, the word "Institute" has almost no legal definition or requirement in a lot of areas so that's why so much Woo comes out of "The Institute for So and So" or the "So Institute for the Study of This or That."
 
The Big Dog said:
https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...esting-is-an-inexact-science-task-force-says/

And the flaws pointed out in this article are present in warren's study because there is no NA data from the USA, as pointed out.

Oh man, sound like science!

/good to see the marriage of racism and anti-religious bigotry in a single post tho. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That's it?

That article doesn't say anything that even comes close to invalidating Warren's testing, or ancestry testing in general. It does invalidate any claim that someone is exactly 32 percent German, but anyone who has a clue about genetics would already know that.
 
BrooklynBaby said:
"It’s all just so weird, basing your self-image on who your grandmother was. And in the Commie Squaw’s case, it’s her great-great-great-great-great-great grandma. It's even creepier basing your views of others on the same meaningless criteria.

Their racism, sexism, and other -isms and -phobias are all so stupid that you can’t help but point at their prejudices and laugh, which really sets Shoveling Bull on the warpath because to her and her elite pals, it’s all so very, very serious.

They actually believe this bigoted garbage. And they hate us because we don’t. And they really hate us when we laugh at them.


But how are we supposed to react? Are we supposed to take them seriously? Nah. We look at people for who they are. Some guy used to call our criteria for evaluating others “the content of their character,” but our alleged betters now dismiss that crazy talk as the ravings of some Christian kook mansplaining away his privilege. We live in the real world, where this nuttiness doesn’t fly, as opposed to an elite that lives in the institutional nuthouses of academia, the media, and the Democrat Party where this nonsense is their secular religion. With them, it’s a constant struggle of the unoppressed oppressed bickering over the spoils of victimhood."

-- Kurt Schlicter

https://townhall.com/columnists/kur...s-how-liberals-are-a-bunch-of-bigots-n2529315
Click to expand...

I read the article this quote comes from. To say that Schlicter is an extreme far right fanatic is putting it mildly. The article is nothing but a hateful, ugly anti-"libtard", only people who think like Schlicter are "Normals" rant. If this is the kind of person you think does you and Republicans any good, I suggest you think again. He only shows just how hateful, nasty, and unbalanced the extreme far right has become. What is sad is that you think posting this is beneficial to your position. In reality, it does just the opposite.
 
Meadmaker said:
That's it?

That article doesn't say anything that even comes close to invalidating Warren's testing, or ancestry testing in general. It does invalidate any claim that someone is exactly 32 percent German, but anyone who has a clue about genetics would already know that.
Click to expand...

No, it is not it.

I was just doing a favor for our correspondent.

‘There is no DNA test to prove you’re Native American’

DNA testing is changing how Native Americans think about tribal membership. Yet anthropologist Kim Tallbear warns that genetic tests are a blunt tool. She tells Linda Geddes why tribal identity is not just a matter of blood ties.

Kim Tall Bear, see also "No DNA test can tell you whether or not you're Native American". Jennifer Raff, an assistant professor University of Kansas
 
Wow, DNA testing companies have a tendency to proclaim Indigenous Ancestry to everyone, including dogs...

https://gizmodo.com/another-dna-testing-company-reportedly-gets-fooled-by-d-1826842819

CBC News went one step further and submitted samples from three of their employees who were natives of India and Russia, respectively, to both Viaguard and the US-based and popular DNA testing company 23andMe. To 23andMe’s credit, its lab seemed to correctly identify the employees’ entirely Eurasian origins, but Viaguard again said all three had 20 percent indigenous DNA, and in the exact same mix that Côté and Snoopy supposedly had.
Click to expand...

DNA testing, amazingly enough, is not used by the Canadian (or American) government to figure out someone’s potential Native American ancestry, and the experts consulted by CBC News say there’s no consumer DNA test that could possibly determine someone’s specific ties to a First Nation tribe.
Click to expand...
 
The Big Dog said:
No, it is not it.

I was just doing a favor for our correspondent.

‘There is no DNA test to prove you’re Native American’

DNA testing is changing how Native Americans think about tribal membership. Yet anthropologist Kim Tallbear warns that genetic tests are a blunt tool. She tells Linda Geddes why tribal identity is not just a matter of blood ties.

Kim Tall Bear, see also "No DNA test can tell you whether or not you're Native American". Jennifer Raff, an assistant professor University of Kansas
Click to expand...

That's a very interesting interview . I like what Kim Tallbear says it means to be a Native American:

Kim Tallbear said:
I tend to come down on the side of political citizenship. It’s true that it’s about much more than blood – culture matters. But our political autonomy matters too, and that helps produce a space in which our cultural traditions can thrive.
Click to expand...

But that doesn't mean much when we are talking about whether or not one has Native American ancestors.

It is also interesting that several tribes do use DNA testing to determine membership. Not relevant to Warren's claims, but interesting. Thanks for sharing.
 
kookbreaker said:
...Do you think anyone will even remember this in 3 weeks unless Trump twitters "Pocahontas!!" "Horseface!!" every few seconds...?
Click to expand...

OK, in all seriousness, I can actually see Trump doing this. Will it affect his ability to concentrate on any current/future situation? Yes.

Has this stopped him before? No.
 
Dr. Keith said:
That's a very interesting interview . I like what Kim Tallbear says it means to be a Native American:



But that doesn't mean much when we are talking about whether or not one has Native American ancestors.

It is also interesting that several tribes do use DNA testing to determine membership. Not relevant to Warren's claims, but interesting. Thanks for sharing.
Click to expand...

Warren ain't a tribe, she is a dope with more money than sense and her rabid supporters are racist shills.

interesting post otherwise tho
 
Vixen said:
Today's DNA testing can pinpoint exactly which 'tribe' you are from.
Click to expand...

Drewbot said:
Wow, DNA testing companies have a tendency to proclaim Indigenous Ancestry to everyone, including dogs...

DNA testing, amazingly enough, is not used by the Canadian (or American) government to figure out someone’s potential Native American ancestry, and the experts consulted by CBC News say there’s no consumer DNA test that could possibly determine someone’s specific ties to a First Nation tribe.
Click to expand...

https://gizmodo.com/another-dna-testing-company-reportedly-gets-fooled-by-d-1826842819
Click to expand...

You might want to tell Vixen this. She insists it can.
 
wareyin said:
ETA: I guess another way of explaining it would be if you walk by a guitar store and hear a kid playing "Smoke on the Water", are you going to believe him if he says he came up with that all by himself?
Click to expand...
No. It's like a kid criticizing Smoke on the Water because it's lame, and you telling that kid that he only thinks that because he read it in Rolling Stone or Spin.
 
The Big Dog said:
Warren ain't a tribe, she is a dope with more money than sense and her rabid supporters are racist shills.

interesting post otherwise tho
Click to expand...

I'm trying to figure out what part of my post made you think that I needed clarification that Warren was not a tribe.

Was it me mentioning that tribes use DNA to determine membership, but that this usage, while interesting, is not relevant to Warren's claim? Because I think the phrase "not relevant" makes it clear that I know they are different. At least as far as the purposes for which they were using DNA tests.
 
The Big Dog said:
https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...esting-is-an-inexact-science-task-force-says/

And the flaws pointed out in this article are present in warren's study because there is no NA data from the USA, as pointed out.

Oh man, sound like science!

/good to see the marriage of racism and anti-religious bigotry in a single post tho. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

There are four things you need to understand from that article

First the headline:
"Genetic ancestry testing is an inexact science"

inexact science ≠ wrong
inexact science ≠ junk science


Second, this paragraph:
"The task force called for greater standardization in analysis methods but also in reporting, so that ancestry results would be delivered—and perhaps interpreted—with the proper amount of essential uncertainty."


Third, the dateline:
By Katherine Harmon on May 14, 2010
That was EIGHT YEARS AGO. As I said earlier, the advances in DNA testing and sequencing since then have been nothing short of dramatic.


Fourth, this paragraph:
Although databases of reference genetic sequences are growing rapidly, many of the major studies have been done from the Human Genetic Diversity Panel, with only about 1,100 genetic samples from across the globe, which means that even much of the vetted academic work on human ancestry is still far from conclusive.

That was then... this is now...

Global DNA Databases
23andMe: 1.2 million
Ancestry DNA: 1.5 million
The Family Tree DNA: 783,000
Assuming there is no overlap between these 3 databases, then their combined database contains about 3.48 million DNA profiles

Finally, the article isn't a report. It was was written by a journalist about a report. If you want to actually LEARN something, read the actual report...

https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(10)00155-2

I doubt you'll understand much of it, or that you have the attention span to read all of it. I thought some of what the journalist wrote looked familiar - I have read this report before. It was one of the references given by NatGeo in the DNA test I took. They wanted people to understand some of the limitations of the test.
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
‘There is no DNA test to prove you’re Native American
Click to expand...

Of course there isn't. It isn't a question of dna or of ancestry. That was Tall Bear's point.

That has nothing to do with the quality of the science used in ancestry testing. That testing can prove that you have a native American ancestor, which is an entirely different question.
 
Dr. Keith says:
Actually only one company, but it sounds better if you make it sound widespread.
Click to expand...

Proving he is only attacking the arguer, and not the argument.

Definitely more than one company in that article.
Last May, NBC Chicago’s own sting investigation found that the DNA testing company Orig3n was unable to tell that an undercover pup named Bailey was in fact a Labrador retriever, not a human. They reported back that Bailey’s genes made her a great candidate for basketball or endurance training (leave your Air Bud jokes in the comments).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom