Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

[Stacyhs]

Elizabeth Warren showing 1.56% 'Native American' is ridiculous. It used to be a standard joke that if you took a DNA test it was bound to come up with '2% Native American'. It's almost a cliché.

Current thinking is that Native American DNA is of a similar haplotype to the Asian subcontinents, and the theory is, the early Native Americans made their way into the American continent via the Bering Strait, then a narrow land mass.

IMV any DNA of the 1% variety can be written off as 'noise'.


https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1051896652259360768

You're missing the point. Warren has always said family lore claimed the N-American ancestor was a 4X great grandmother...which is in keeping with what the DNA found.

Her N-American DNA was also “as would be expected for Native American ancestry deriving from the lower 48 states of the United States.”

 

[Norman Alexander]

The thing is, 6 - 10 generations is not very far back. If its at the six generations end, and given that Warren was born in 1949, then a single Native American ancestor as the source of the DNA would have lived sometime in the mid to late-1800s. Given that records researched by American genealogists can go back back to the 1700's and earlier, then it is not beyond reason that this individual might still be able to be identified by an expert genealogical researcher.

I have one identifiable individual in my ancestry who is seven generations back (from me) and we found him in the 1841 England and Wales census; we know his name and where he lived.

I have one ancestor by proven lineage that is North American native about 10 generations back. Interestingly, it was Pocahontas. Actually true!

 

[I Am The Scum]

Sorry? 'Warren has ten times more Native American DNA than someone from Utah and twelve times more than a Brit'?

Given the average Brit has vanishingly remote Native American DNA, twelve times 0.1% is a far less impressive way of saying 'twelve times more than 0.015'.

That's called 'lying by statistics'.

Earlier you were saying that she had the same amount as everyone else. Now 10x as much isn't a wide enough margin. You jumped in not knowing what you were talking about.

I would be utterly astonished if you admit you were wrong on this one. Just learn your lesson and do better next time.

 

[Vixen]

My ancestors from England were in Maryland 10 or more generations ago (circa 1645). I guess it's ludicrous to claim I have British ancestry. At which generation was it still ok? And what do I say now if asked where my ancestors immigrated from?

If you were to assemble all of your ancestors from ten generations ago, they'd number 1,024 at generation #1, decreasing downwards to your two parents, but it wouldn't look like a very big crowd, say you got them all under one roof.

If they are all Native American apart from the one or two English guys, then unless you were in touch with that side of your culture, it is understandable people would express scepticism at your claim to be be an Englishman.

Having said that, people should feel free to self-identify whichever way they want.

 

[Elagabalus]

Do we know that "Gulag Barbie" is actually from the gulag? And which one?

 

[johnny karate]

Then parse English better. It was crystal clear.

A conversation, but your agenda is getting in your way, so never mind.

You involved yourself in a specific discussion about a specific claim.

If you’re asking something that is independent of that specific claim, then make that clear and ask it.

 

[kookbreaker]

Sorry? 'Warren has ten times more Native American DNA than someone from Utah and twelve times more than a Brit'?

Given the average Brit has vanishingly remote Native American DNA, twelve times 0.1% is a far less impressive way of saying 'twelve times more than 0.015'.

That's called 'lying by statistics'.

Vixen: She doesn’t have any more NA than any other American!!!
Analysis: She has 10x as an average European defended woman.
Vixen: Lying with statistics!!!!!

 

[Vixen]

Earlier you were saying that she had the same amount as everyone else. Now 10x as much isn't a wide enough margin. You jumped in not knowing what you were talking about.

I would be utterly astonished if you admit you were wrong on this one. Just learn your lesson and do better next time.

Ten times near zero is still a near zero figure.

 

[Stacyhs]

Sorry? 'Warren has ten times more Native American DNA than someone from Utah and twelve times more than a Brit'?

Given the average Brit has vanishingly remote Native American DNA, twelve times 0.1% is a far less impressive way of saying 'twelve times more than 0.015'.

That's called 'lying by statistics'.

You ignore the findings from Utah. Or do they also count as the average Brit?

 

[Vixen]

You're missing the point. Warren has always said family lore claimed the N-American ancestor was a 4X great grandmother...which is in keeping with what the DNA found.

Her N-American DNA was also “as would be expected for Native American ancestry deriving from the lower 48 states of the United States.”

OK, fair enough.

 

[Vixen]

You ignore the findings from Utah. Or do they also count as the average Brit?

Aren't they a bunch of cultist Mormons who have only ever married amongst themselves?

You may as well say 'Warren has fifteen times more Native American than the Amish population'.

 

[The Big Dog]

I guess people from "Utah" (Utah??) have significantly less Columbian heritage than Warren.

Utah?

 

[LSSBB]

I have a better idea. Please explain why she has no Native American ancestry. In your own words.

You've been trying to get people on this thread to 'define minority' on this thread as a distraction over and over. Give it a rest.

Regardless, if no definition was provided on what a minority is, on any forms she filled out where she checked that box, what we or anyone else think doesn't matter. With no such restrictions, she can't be held on violation of the question on the form. It's a meaningless quibble by her opponents.

 

[johnny karate]

Are you sure?

View attachment 39098

That's a recipe from a cookbook with the word "Cherokee" next to Warren's name, not Warren herself claiming to be a member of the Cherokee tribe.

 

[smartcooky]

23+me does now have a feature which shows you how far back your different ethnicities go. It is fascinating.

It's simple statistics, really. Say you are 5% 'Italian'. It will tell you you likely had one great-grandparent who was a full-blood Italian.

The caveat is, it might not be the one g-grandparent, but a generalised inheritance that goes back generations via several random individuals. (Background noise.)

Can you see how this likely defeats the point to are trying to make?

If 5% represents a single, full-blood Italian g-grandparent, but this can be proved to be not true, then that means your 5% comes from multiple Italian ancestors further back on your family tree. This is most definitely does NOT equate to "background noise".

 

[Stacyhs]

This whole discussion has gotten off the point.

1.Warren claimed she had some distant Native-American ancestry. She never stipulated how much.

2. She said the story was handed down through the family.

3.Trump, in his usual stupid need to denigrate and mock, called her 'Pocahontas'.

4. Trump declared if she took a DNA test and it determined she had N-A lineage, he'd donate $1 million to a charity she named.

5. DNA test found her to have N-A lineage.

6. Trump denies the $1 million donation to charity.

All this nonsense about what percentage she has, how much most Americans may have, the cook book, the directory, whether she's a member of a tribe, etc is nothing but an attempt to distract from the fact that Trump ended up with egg on his face yet again.

 

[kookbreaker]

Aren't they a bunch of cultist Mormons who have only ever married amongst themselves?

You may as well say 'Warren has fifteen times more Native American than the Amish population'.

1) Utah is not just Mormons
2) Mormons only started in the early-mid 19th century, their members did not form out of clay. They had ancestors who were and weren’t part of the US landscape, including very possible Native intermarriage
3) Bringham Young actually encouraged marrying Native Americans. The numbers were small but they did happen.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Int...e_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints

 

[Vixen]

I can grasp that. What I wonder is, is it possible to have a parent or grandparent (not a distant relative) who is a certain ethnicity and still show only a few % that ethnicity in a DNA test?

Articles like the following make that seem it seem a bit more vague than that.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health...mother-was-italian-why-arent-my-genes-italian

It's obvious that a person is 50% of each of their parents.

Where it becomes complicated is in the phenotypes. Thus you can have two or three generations of, say, brunettes on both sides, and suddenly a blonde appears.

I expect this is what happened with Warren's mother: had Native Indian features, which were a throwback two generations.

It's not uncommon for a person to look like one of the grandparents.

 

[johnny karate]

Sorry? 'Warren has ten times more Native American DNA than someone from Utah and twelve times more than a Brit'?

Given the average Brit has vanishingly remote Native American DNA, twelve times 0.1% is a far less impressive way of saying 'twelve times more than 0.015'.

That's called 'lying by statistics'.

You also made this claim:

IMV any DNA of the 1% variety can be written off as 'noise'.

And you were immediately proven to be wrong.

Suffice it to say, your attempt to present yourself as authority on this topic is laughable.

 

[smartcooky]

"Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."

Which of course, you could rightly spin to call "blasted" if Warren was actually claiming "tribal heritage". Perhaps you could show us all where she makes any "tribal heritage" claim.