Family Tree Dna Release: Fill & Download for Free

A stunning 2003 paper “The Genetic Legacy of The Mongols”, published in The American Journal of Human Genetics, released data on Genghis Khan’s bloodline.According to the data, 1 in 200 men has a direct relation to Genghis Khan. (They were able to trace a Y-chromosome from Khan. Y-chromosomes are only passed from father to son.)If you are a man living within the confines of the old Mongol Empire, the number rises to an 8% probability.The simple explanation:Genghis Khan had 11 children. 5 were sons. (but probably many more not known of.)Each of those sons had a bunch of children, many of them sons.Then those children had a bunch of sons. Those sons had more sons. And so on.Essentially, because of the prestige of their Khan name, the security and vitality it brought, the Khan boys were having lots of children for many generations.His family tree expanded rapidly, pushing his bloodline out and into the world for nearly 800 years.And now many of you are related to an infamous Warlord.Me?Not so much. I’m just a DNA spinoff of an old Irish Potato Farmer :)

Let’s look at the big picture first.Warren’s central offense dates back to the mid 1980s, when she first formally notified law school administrators that her family tree includes Native Americans. Warren said she grew up with family stories about both grandparents on her mother’s side having some Cherokee or Delaware blood.[1][1][1][1]That’s it. That’s the sum total of what I could find. Donald Trump decided to make it a big deal.Elizabeth Warren decided to take a DNA test to prove her case. Per the article supplied, a test found that she very likely has Native American DNA. Not a lot, but some.Is it conclusive? I wouldn’t say that, but I don’t really need it to be.I DIDN’T CARE ABOUT IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.I found the “Pocahontas” name insulting in the first place. I don’t just mean that it insulted Elizabeth Warren.It insulted America. It was low class. It was elementary school. It made everyone who heard it just a little stupider.It insulted Native Americans. Apparently among the giant list of things Trump doesn’t know is the true story of Pocahontas. Perhaps a better understanding is:The real Pocahontas was married off to a white man old enough to be her father when she was a teenager. She was then trotted around as a “noble savage” for a few years before she got sick and died. Her culture was destroyed and her relatives murdered.[2][2][2][2]Not that Trump would necessarily care. He’s a bully who literally calls people names.As to the science behind 23andMe? I did it. I was satisfied with my results. It worked with what I’ve known from my family tree.Footnotes[1] The facts: Elizabeth Warren and her Native American ties[1] The facts: Elizabeth Warren and her Native American ties[1] The facts: Elizabeth Warren and her Native American ties[1] The facts: Elizabeth Warren and her Native American ties[2] Does Disney's Pocahontas Do More Harm Than Good? [2] Does Disney's Pocahontas Do More Harm Than Good? [2] Does Disney's Pocahontas Do More Harm Than Good? [2] Does Disney's Pocahontas Do More Harm Than Good?

She didn’t just claim some Native “history.” She literally marked herself as Native American on official forms and as part of her employment bio data. She claimed this Native status, specifically. Heck, she even submitted content to a Native American book, and had herself listed as “Liz Warren, Cherokee.”When she was called out for all of this, she doubled down and claimed she was of Cherokee and Delaware heritage. Again, that is stating tribal affiliation.After that, she released DNA admixture tests showing a minute level of general Native admixture, going back to an unidentified ancestors 8 generations back, plus or minus two gens either way. That would represent the late 1600 to mid 1700s in her particular case (based on ages and known/extant family tree). And that is even if you accept the validity of autosomal/admixture test ESTIMATES or algorithms.Now, just imagine for a second that we replaced the Native American claim with African American or Black status.Imagine if she marked her race as Black, consistently. And identified as Black and that she was proud of her “African American heritage.” Then, a traditional family tree is done, digging up her known ancestors pretty far back. And they are all White, as far as the long paper trail shows. But, then she pulls out a DNA admixture test that shows .0-something percent Sub-Saharan African result…going back to a supposed theoretical Black ancestors born before the American Revolution. And then she says, “See! I am Black, or that is my family’s heritage!!”Woudl that be seen as okay? Legitimate in the eyes of the wider public?No, probably not.If it gets qualified sufficiently, then sure, it’s just an ancestral oddity or unique signature in the vast array of one’s overral genome. It’s not that big of a deal.So, if someone wants to celebrate an extremely low level autosomal DNA result (well below the testing margin of error level, by the way), then that is up to them. But, that doesn’t necessarily mean that OTHERS accept their “right” to claim some ethnic or racial status.