On Sep 25, 2008, at 4:21 PM, Herbert Barger wrote:

> I am not familiar with TV shows regarding DNA. All I know that the "Y"
> was used for the TJ study and there is absolutely (at that time,) not
> test to determine given names.
Within the parameters of the test and the subject matter at the time,  
that is correct.

> I personally do not object to science
> obtaining Mr Jefferson's DNA,
Excellent. I'm assuming you'd push for that?

> however I have enough faith in the
> geneticists that inform me that even if available it would still be
> matching DNA to the five Jefferson males selected for the study.
Ideally, it would go after all the DNA it could get to definitively  
prove the relationships or lack thereof.

> I do
> not believe the American public would "go along" with such amateurish
> digging.
That doesn't follow. Any work done on TJ, or RJ or any of the others  
would of necessity have to adhere to the highest archaeological and  
scientific standards to be accepted.
>
>
> There is no "double standard" here but if the Madison Hemings family  
> are
> so sure that they descend from ANY Jefferson why won't they promote  
> and
> approve this dig
In this issue, there are double, triple and quadruple standards and  
that is the crux of the problem. The St. Thomas brigade believes and  
wishes for there to be no definitive proof that TJ fathered a child or  
children with SH. The Madison and Eston brigades seem to want to  
believe, no matter what, that there is a Jefferson in the family tree.  
Both sides are the extremes in this matter. It can be inferred that  
there is more than a smattering of racism from both extremes.

Not allowing the full and unbiased DNA testing of all parties  
concerned will do nothing but cause problems. As Herb points out  
correctly, there are books that twist the DNA results way beyond the  
realm of possibility. That happens when you have non-scientific types  
writing about science and for that matter in lots of endeavors. And it  
happens when you have agenda driven writers, etc. And it is not  
limited to this argument either, but that's another flame war.

> ......there is NO DNA proof that Madison and Eston SHARE
> a common father. If they were to gain this valuable DNA then a  
> possible
> Madison/Carr brother match would occur just as the Carr boys claimed.
> When we tested ONLY ONE, then that only cleared the Carrs for that
> ONE,(Eston).
That would be correct.

> Monticello using the biased and defective Monticello Study
> still believe that not only TJ may have fathered one but ALL
That is a misinterpretation of the test results, yes.

> and that is
> preposterous BIAS.
And it is nearly as big (based on smaller numbers) a preposterous BIAS  
to argue that TJ cannot possibly have fathered a child with SH.

> I have called upon them to again conduct another
> study using balanced research not intentional maneuvering as discussed
> on earlier posts.
Historical research is not going to solve it. DNA can do that and it  
is the only test which has any possibility of so doing.

An instructive aside: A small church in London called Spitalfields  
(derived from Hospital Fields) had a crypt full of folks in lead  
coffins. The church desired to turn the crypt into some form of  
community center. They contacted the descendants of the folks in the  
coffins and involved them in the move and those who were willing had  
their ancestors investigated by physical anthropologists using  
standard methods. And this was done by a good number of PA's as a test  
case. The results were amazing. One woman, as far as I remember, was  
determined by the PA's to have been in her late 30's when she died,  
childless. In actual fact, she was in her 80's and had had numerous  
children. Whoops. What that taught the PA's was that they needed to go  
back and examine the evidence firsthand to correlate it with the  
historic information. That was done and archaeology and physical  
anthropology are much the better off for it. This was made into a TV  
program called "The Skeletons at Spitalfields".

While it may have been embarrassing for the PA's at first, their  
adherence to academic and scientific principles superseded other  
considerations and they worked through the problems and arrived at a  
better level of knowledge than they formerly had.

It is my opinion that both sides in the TJ issue need to do just that  
and if they really wish to get at the truth, however embarrassing it  
may or may not be, then they will support additional and definitive  
testing.

So, Herb, are you up for that? Chips fall where they may? Full  
disclosure, etc as a precondition?

Lyle Browning
>
>
> Herb Barger
>
> Herb,
>
> As I understand it, DNA is specific enough to determine which between
> two
> brother is the father of a given baby or rapist of a woman or child.
> Either
> that or they deceive on otherwise reputable tv police shows!
>
> So, I would think that TJs specific DNA would clear up problems of
> whether
> or not his brother or nephews did the dastardly deed. Less than his
> specific
> DNA will not sufficiently clear up the controversy. You complain about
> the
> Hemings not wanting to dig up dear old granddad since they have no  
> doubt
> as
> to the veracity of their family history. So, why is it you don't  
> want to
> dig
> up ole TJ?
>
> Is this a double standard?
>
> Anne
>
> Anne Pemberton
>
> ______________________________________
> 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