GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-06 > 1086127845


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Interpreting -- getting results for all markers ordered
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 15:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8c.c586da6.2dee3256@cs.com>


James: I say, what pray tell do you mean, "there is more to it than that"? I have no beef whatsoever with DNAHeritage. Perhaps I am a plant, an FTDNA lackie........? Whatever. The fact that you would seem to be keeping tract of everything I say in relation to DNAHeritage and quoting "checkered" (which apparently means something else in Canadian, eh) would perhaps lead some to wonder about your apparently "close" relationship with DNAHeritage. Give it up S.V.P. and lets move on to productive DNA - genealogy topics.

David.

wrote:
In a message dated 6/1/2004 1:57:52 PM Central Standard Time,
writes:
> I am a big fan of FTDNA, and freely admit it.

There seems to be more to it than that. You know or should know by now that
your previous post was based on Charles' incorrect interpretation of Diane's
results. Yet, you have not posted a retraction.

This is on top of your reference to DNAHeritage's "checkered history," even
though they had the same problem as FTDNA. Both used university labs that could
not keep up with the order flow. "Checkered" carries the implication of
crooked dealings. Yet Alastair was so honest he gave per-diem rebates for late
results, even though most people had paid only $80 for a 20-marker test.




Dr. David K. Faux, P.O. Box 192, Seal Beach, CA, 90740, USA


www.davidkfaux.org



This thread: