Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

[Vixen]

You do understand that, if you have an ancestor who was part native, that applies to all your other ancestors from that person up to you, right?

All of your other ancestors increase exponentially as well. So it'd be even more diluted than that.

 

[Stacyhs]

Vixen doesn't seem to understand that as soon as the marriage is complete (or to be certain, consumated) the point of eloping is accomplished.

Nor does she seem to understand that ministers, and not only justices of the peace, can and do preside of elopements.

 

[Vixen]

A woman born in Muskogee in 1912 might well have Cherokee ancestry—certainly not improbable apriori—given the location of that city on the boundary of the Cherokee OTSA (large PDF, alas).

If I was born in stable does that make one a horse?

 

[Vixen]

Her mother actually is partially Native American, so yes, that works. This was the era of the One Drop Rule. All that was needed to arouse bigotry was a local suspicion of mixed race ancestry.

I mean, look at the lynchings that were taking place at the time. Look at the burning of Greenwood just a few years before the marriage. This was not a reasonable time in race relations.

It is really so hard to accept that even a rumor of mixed-race ancestry could upset people?

Are you claiming Warren is (a) a minority group and (b) is a victim of social disadvantage/discrimination?

A reality check is called for.

 

[pgwenthold]

Vixen doesn't seem to understand that as soon as the marriage is complete (or to be certain, consumated) the point of eloping is accomplished.

This is boggling my mind. The claim is that they didn't elope, they just left town to get married?

And remember when her claim is that they had a big, normal church wedding? That was funny.

 

[Belz...]

they are not, but we are already shown that.

Saying is not the same as showing. Your word is not evidence.

 

[Vixen]

Thanks dam10n - this part is pretty important - but should be quite easy to understand

If you are looking for someone with indigenous North American ancestry, Mexican groups are sufficient. If anything this will reduce your power to detect, not produce false positives.

Warren has markers that are found in indigenous American populations but not European populations. The fact that the reference population came from South America means that they can only test for those markers that are common to both populations, which could make her indigenous ancestry seem more remote than it actually was.
​

Given her stated family lore is consistent with her DNA, it's reasonable to accept it rather than a more exotic, and less plausible idea that somehow she has indigenous South American ancestry.

There is every reason for her to have believed her family lore and it seems to be borne out by her DNA. It's silly (or disingenuous) to pretend otherwise.

Let's run past this again. You are saying that because the test was only able to pick up South American matches, Warren is even more exotic than anybody knew as the NA part is still yet to be revealed?


Okaaaay.

 

[Vixen]

Turns out Warren is a person of color after all.

Really? You are recommending she runs on that ticket?

 

[Belz...]

No, it's a paraphrase, hence the quotation marks.

 

[Belz...]

All of your other ancestors increase exponentially as well. So it'd be even more diluted than that.

Wow so no, you don't understand it at all.

That has literally nothing to do with what I said.

 

[Vixen]

Such things were common at the time. "One Drop Rule" was thing. Not legally applicable in this case, but culturally strongly enforced. Mostly focused on African-American ancestry, but bigotry does not always distinguish between shades of non-white.

How do you not know this?

One-drop rule’ persists



Warren's DNA test suggests that Warren's Native American ancestor could be as recent as six generations ago. That would her mother's Great-Great-Great Grandmother. One less step than in a court case from 1985!

Again - how do you not know this?

That would apply to a very large number of Americans according to the DNA experts. Most Americans have more NA DNA than Warren.

 

[Vixen]

Then you are exception that proves the rule. From looking at the majority of those here denigrating Warren, they are clearly Trump supporters.

Don't judge others by your own standards.

Just because you are a fanatical democrat rationalising the behaviour of a democrat presidential candidate, it does not logically follow that those who can see her antics for what they are are Trump supporters.

Logic is not your strong point, I see.

 

[Stacyhs]

That would apply to a very large number of Americans according to the DNA experts. Most Americans have more NA DNA than Warren.

Citation for this claim?

 

[Stacyhs]

Don't judge others by your own standards.

Just because you are a fanatical democrat rationalising the behaviour of a democrat presidential candidate, it does not logically follow that those who can see her antics for what they are are Trump supporters.

Logic is not your strong point, I see.

Warren is not a Dem presidential candidate...unless you have read an announcement that others have not?

No, I just see it for what it is: much ado about nothing. It's being used the same way Trump used his birther nonsense.

"Fantatical democrat"? LOL! By the way, it's "Democrat" as it's a proper noun. Unless of course, the British are more flexible when it comes to capitalizing proper nouns.

ETA: at least my logic tells me that when two people go to the next town and get married then return home the next day to announce their surprise marriage, it's an elopement.

 

[Vixen]

I thought the wager was $1m to charity?

Even winning $1m to your favourite charity is a big adrenaline rush.

 

[Vixen]

DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT quotation MARKS SIGNIFY IN CONVENTIONAL ENGLISH EITHER SIDE OF THE ATLANTIC?

The clue is in the name.

Stop shouting. Quotation marks are also correctly used for slang, vernacular or as a figure of speech.

 

[Vixen]

Vixen doesn't seem to understand that as soon as the marriage is complete (or to be certain, consumated) the point of eloping is accomplished.

He married her mother when he was aged twenty-one. As he did not need parental consent to marry at twenty-one, it is not in any technical, abstract or legal sense 'an elopement'.

 

[Vixen]

Warren is not a Dem presidential candidate...unless you have read an announcement that others have not?

No, I just see it for what it is: much ado about nothing. It's being used the same way Trump used his birther nonsense.

"Fantatical democrat"? LOL! By the way, it's "Democrat" as it's a proper noun. Unless of course, the British are more flexible when it comes to capitalizing proper nouns.

ETA: at least my logic tells me that when two people go to the next town and get married then return home the next day to announce their surprise marriage, it's an elopement.

In the UK it is possible to be conservative or liberal with either a capital initial or a generic lower case one.

 

[acbytesla]

He married her mother when he was aged twenty-one. As he did not need parental consent to marry at twenty-one, it is not in any technical, abstract or legal sense 'an elopement'.

You really don't know what your talking about as usual.

Elopement:

an act or instance of running off secretly, as to be married. Dictionary.com

elopement is often used to refer to a marriage conducted in sudden and secretive fashion, usually involving a hurried flight away from one's place of residence together with one's beloved with the intention of getting married. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elopement
tpedia

to leave home secretly to get married https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/elope

1. To run away with a lover, especially with the intention of getting married.
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/elopement

 

[Stacyhs]

That would apply to a very large number of Americans according to the DNA experts. Most Americans have more NA DNA than Warren.

Citation for this claim?

Since your history for providing citations for your claims is, shall we say rather spotty, let me help you:

The results — which identified Native American DNA from six to 10 generations ago — were immediately misinterpreted.

It started with a Boston Globe report, which initially said that the test showed she was between 1/32nd and 1/514th Native American. After confessing twice to a math error, the Globe corrected that to between 1/64th and 1/1024th Native American. That would translate to between 98.44 percent and 99.9 percent not Native American.

The RNC then issued a news release directing reporters to a 2014 New York Times report that said “European-Americans had genomes that were on average 98.6 percent European, .19 percent African, and .18 Native American.” So it sounded like Warren had less Native American DNA than the average European-American.

But it turns out reporters and politicians are not very good at understanding genetics. So we will set the record straight, after reviewing the results in detail and consulting with genetics experts.

With reporters believing that Warren’s genome was only as much as 1.56 percent Native American, the article’s line that “European-Americans had genomes that were on average 98.6 percent European, .19 percent African, and .18 Native American” made it appear as if Warren’s sample was even smaller than that of the average American. Not so. Remember we said that the Bustamante study said she had 10 times more than the individuals from Utah? That’s the relevant statistic, indicating that her claim to some Native American heritage is much stronger than most European Americans.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/fact...g/ar-BBOxm95?li=AA54ur&fdhead=HP-GBL-HP-IP-NA