VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Lyle E. Browning" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 4 Nov 2008 22:08:19 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
Sorry again, Herbert, you simply cannot twist the evidence in that  
direction conclusively. The case is not proved for or against either  
Randolph or Thomas or any other Jefferson. One of them provided the  
genetic material. The DNA did not match Randolph, it was a generic  
Jefferson match. You cannot jump from a generic to a specific match or  
exclusion based upon it. Oral history indicates Randolph, but the DNA  
neither proves nor disproves it, nor does it prove or disprove Thomas  
or ay other Jefferson. That's as far as you can take the evidence and  
certainly not as far as you have taken it in your post.

Lyle Browning


On Nov 4, 2008, at 9:38 PM, Herbert Barger wrote:

> Like most everything else in this controversy there is no ABSOLUTE  
> smoking
> gun, however the Eston family always claimed related to Randolph with
> Jefferson DNA....his descendant was tested and as Eston's family had  
> always
> claimed.......there was a match. There is nothing to prove or  
> suggest it was
> Thomas....all circumstantial information points to Randolph.
>
> Herb
>
> Sorry, Herbert, but there's a part of your paragraph that's wrong. See
> below:
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2008, at 5:15 PM, Herbert Barger wrote:
>
>> In my opinion, using your analysis, he may have been honoring his
>> father,
>> RANDOLPH JEFFERSON, who he indicated was his father by oral  
>> tradition.
> Fine so far by oral tradition.
>
> ..BUT NOT Thomas.
> Wrong, as it neither proves nor disproves Thomas. It merely says that
> there is some Jefferson in the paternity line but cannot distinguish
> which one, nor can it rule out one or another.
>
> That is the point which has been argued time and again on this list.
> You've twinned the two lines of evidence in a way that's not
> supportable by the evidence.
>
> Lyle Browning
>
> ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the  
> instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US