GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-09 > 1125574651


From:
Subject: R1b Nomenclature
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 07:37:31 EDT


In a message dated 8/31/2005 11:34:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
writes:

> I like your Irish One / Irish Two example. I've been wracking my brains
> ever
> since Peter first voiced his objection to using "Irish" and "Scot" as
> shorthand phrases. I do appreciate his point that these words might easily
> be
> misconstrued, even when they are placed in quotes -- but on the other hand,
> Ken is
> noticing some real differences in the geographic distribution of certain
> haplotypes, so we need some vocabulary to talk about it.

Ann and list,

I have thought about this problem also and have decided to use
"Irish-Scottish" and "Scottish-Irish" to designate these two populations. Using this
nomenclature based on the predominate location first recognizes that there is a
heavy commingling of samples. In addition, since we can't definitively draw a
black and white line yet between the Irish and the Scots, there is no need to
alienate either of my groups of participants by labeling them one or the other.

This might be confusing for others but it works for me.

Also, I would like to restate my general concern that people on this list
draw conclusions based on sample sizes that are (1) too small, (2) biased, and
(3) unvalidated. As the old statistics adage goes, "if you torture the numbers
enough, they will tell you whatever you want".

This thread: