Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

197FTDNA Null values

Expand Messages
  • Bill Howard
    Sep 9, 2012
      Kevin Campbell wrote me an off-line email about the zero marker situation, making a suggestion that a note should be written to Bennett Greenspan to make sure that he knows that the zero-markers they report is a systematic problem that he should look into.

      I have been suggesting to Bennett that he should offer a dated phylogenetic tree along with FTDNA's probability calls to people who are tested via Y-DNA at FTDNA. I fear I may have turned him off, although I grouped his Greenspan results in clusters and dates, both of which he agrees with. If he were to charge extra for it, Greenspan would make more money and give more worthwhile relationship information on a testee's surname group than he is giving now. It would remove much confusion on the part of testees who cannot now interpret their results.

      FTDNA is not doing us a service by grouping markers in a single column -- it makes input to my Mathematica tree-making program much more difficult. Many have written to FTDNA requesting separate columns for the markers, but that problem persists.

      Now they have the zero-value problem. If they say it's a bad upload, how much can we trust the other values, which probably also must be uploaded? This looks like a serious credibility problem.

      - Bye from Bill Howard
    • Show all 6 messages in this topic