View Full Version : DNA - proven or disproven
We all do DNA tests for various reasons, my Dad was curious about his ethnicity, which was as expected except for 2%, which had us all laughing. Others do it to prove their tree correct or to fill in blanks or disprove something they have been told.
I'm just curious has anyone had a DNA test disprove something you believed to be true? Or proved something you had thought untrue? I'm not trying to open a can of worms and talk about things close to home, unless people want to, but maybe more distant theories you had?
Also comment about things DNA has proven, that you are happy about.
For me this is more of an interest and another avenue or research. I am happy to discover people I have had contact with as we share the same relatives have also had DNA tests so my research is correct, at least on those lines.
When her mother died, best mate was told her father wasn't her father. This was a cruel and unnecessary lie, which DNA triumphantly refuted.
Her mother's mother reinvented herself, changing her name and breaking contact with her family. We were told that her parents were an Irish farmer and a French actress. Well, we knocked that myth on the head too.
As for me, I think that my Granny was a changling.....!
I convinced my Dad to do an Ancestry DNA test to try and solve some of the mysteries of his Sussex ancestors.
Firstly, his great-great grandfather Charles Tupper's baptism in 1807 was recorded without parents. I deduced/assumed that his parents were probably Thomas and Ann who had other children baptised in the same parish around the same time.
Two DNA matches who have family trees which include members of the same Tupper family, although I would like to check up on their research before I am totally satisfied that I am correct.
Secondly there are several problems in researching his grandmother Laura Martin's family. I think her father Robert was the only son of his family to have children, although its possible his brother James did. Although I can find birth records for the four sons (two died in infancy) I cannot locate a marriage for their parents, William Martin and Elizabeth Berwick. A DNA match to someone with Martin or Berwick ancestry might point me in the right direction there.
Also Laura's grandmother Sophia (nee Linn) Bishop, is missing a baptism.
Circumstantial (children's Baptism records, census records) indicate she might be a child of Nicholas and Sophia (nee Lee) Linn. Dad has a reasonable (34cms) with a fourth cousin, descendant of another of Sophia's daughters, so I am hoping to find a fifth cousin, a descendant of one of the other Linn children.
20 of Dad's closest 21 DNA matches are from his paternal Collis family - and more are scattered through his more distant DNA matches - all from the four siblings who migrated to Australia.
Di
As for me, I think that my Granny was a changling.....!
I think a few of us have that issue.
My Leeds colour thing has 2 gaps in it, although I did 8 colours, not 4. I do have lots of matches that I can't work out and could fill the gaps though.
I'm trying to work out if I know paternity at a certain point must be correct based on DNA matches does that imply other things are correct. I'm going to look at it again tomorrow but there may be a new thread coming. :rolleyes:
kiterunner
07-03-19, 12:16
I have posted this before on here, but anyway: there has always been a theory that my father had some Jewish ancestry, but I had eventually managed to trace all his official lines back a few generations and found none. Then he and I both had DNA tests which came up with significant percentages of Jewish DNA, and we finally managed to figure out that my Granny's biological father was from a Jewish family who lived round the corner from her mother's family.
Apart from that line, so far, I have confirmed DNA matches on both sides of my paternal grandfather's tree, and on my paternal grandmother's mother's side, then on my maternal grandfather's father's side, but not on his mother's side yet, and on most of my maternal grandmother's lines but still have a couple of those to prove.
Anstey Nomad
07-03-19, 19:40
DNA testing proved my research on my four times great grandfather. It also very rapidly proved, through the matches, that my Dad was actually my biological father, which I had doubted for many years.
I'm quite impressed with your detective work Kate.
maggie_4_7
08-03-19, 06:41
I'm quite impressed with your detective work Kate.
Me too.
kiterunner
08-03-19, 09:16
Thanks. It took a lot of work!
maggie_4_7
08-03-19, 09:45
Thanks. It took a lot of work!
I think this is the problem, most people seem to think once you have a DNA test it will unravel all the mysteries but as we all know it takes a lot of work and even more so when there are all these people coming up as matches with absolutely no trees online.
That is why I think people lose interest, they don't realise the work that goes into it and unless you really enjoy it, the journey as well as the results, it is probably a bit if a waste of time especially on Ancestry because they must have taken their DNA tests with them but have no trees!
The other danger is it will unravel a mystery they didn't even know existed.
I think I must scare some people rigid, when I say, okay, you have no online tree, but I reckon you are... (Come to think of it, they are usually the people who don't reply:d)
kiterunner
08-03-19, 17:26
I feel it would be too scary to do that, Phoenix, so I try to send a more generic message even if I have figured out their tree.
Lol, I hope I don't come across quite so bluntly, but the absence of a tree doesn't necessarily mean you can't pinpoint them.
I do think it's scary, which is probably why there are a lot of seasoned researchers on Ancestry with no trees up.
I say you have X in your tree if it is easy to see that person and have had a reasonable success rate with that. It helps if I can provide a bit of information they don't appear to have. I've had no luck with matches that have no trees though.
You would scare me Phoenix, knowing the relationship when there is no tree.
Well I just spent an hour disproving a ThruLines suggestion and also a DNA matches private tree only to discover when I went to write notes on my offline tree that I have already disproved this suggestion years ago.
I still can't work out how a different match that also seems to link in to what I disproved is related.
Well I just spent an hour disproving a ThruLines suggestion and also a DNA matches private tree only to discover when I went to write notes on my offline tree that I have already disproved this suggestion years ago.
I still can't work out how a different match that also seems to link in to what I disproved is related.
I looked at a suggested DNA match to my daughter - man of same name and place of birth as her 4xg grandfather, ten years difference in age. But the match did not appear in her maternal grandfathers DNA matches, so it could not be the same man. The DNA match is with her father's sisters DNA matches, so a completely different family from around the same area of Sussex. Not enough info to figure out the actual common ancestor. There must be one, not just the suggested one.
If you look at the Thrulines, it tells you whose tree the information is taken from - on one match, my tree shows for my daughter's line, but there are at least 3 other trees linking to the supposed DNA match. I guess that means checking each of the trees which provide one or two generations and make sure they do fit together.
There appears to be no way to tell Ancestry that their ThruLines suggestion are wrong, which will be a bit annoying as we check off their suggestions.
I was wondering if we could tell ancestry they are wrong.
I think the link is through the woman I think is my relative, not the woman ancestry is suggesting is my relative. The problem is while I can disprove the other woman I can't work out where my relative came from. She arrived on earth in time to marry, had 3 children and then returned to wherever she came from. I don't know why but they are not suggesting a link for her husband. Inconveniently there are 3 men of the same name, who marry within a few years of each other, to a woman with the same first name and 2 of the men, at least, have the same occupation.
maggie_4_7
10-03-19, 09:32
I was wondering if we could tell ancestry they are wrong.
I think the link is through the woman I think is my relative, not the woman ancestry is suggesting is my relative. The problem is while I can disprove the other woman I can't work out where my relative came from. She arrived on earth in time to marry, had 3 children and then returned to wherever she came from. I don't know why but they are not suggesting a link for her husband. Inconveniently there are 3 men of the same name, who marry within a few years of each other, to a woman with the same first name and 2 of the men, at least, have the same occupation.
Are you getting the 'provide feedback' popup?
f you are click on it and fill in the survey it is only short but there are boxes where you can write stuff and I have used this to make suggestions, I have now filled in about 5 :), whether they take any notice of it is another matter.
I am getting the feedback option and yes I have given some. I have to admit I saw it on one screen and thought they wont care if this match is wrong. I should have been thinking to tell them they need an ignore button in general.
I gave feedback when my 2x great-grandfather disappeared from Thrulines (not from my tree) and a suggested impostor appeared. He had disappeared from a cousin's Thrulines too though she didn't get the suggestion of another person, He returned after 2 days. Now another ancestor has gone awol today from Thrulines :(
vBulletin® v3.8.7 PL3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.