Then I suggest you read the rest of the message I just sent, in which I 
explained the answer.

JEFFREY D SOUTHMAYD wrote:

> Don't know what his previous publications about pottery and architecture have to do with this either.
>
>J South
>
>
>
>You are indeed missing the most fundamental point of all: Professor 
>Neiman does not engage the DNA evidence. Instead, he engages the 
>apparent coincidences between Sally Hemings's conceptions and TJ's 
>sporadic presences at Monticello. He professes to have used statistical 
>science to prove that the coincidences prove that TJ fathered six 
>Hemings children. 
>
> 
>
>
> 
>
>
>JDS
>
> 
>
>
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Steven T. Corneliussen <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:53 am
>Subject: Re: A modest proposal re the DNA debate
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Don't know what any of this research and writing 
>
> > has to do with expertise in dna analysis, but perhaps 
>
> > I am missing something. 
> 
>
>You are indeed missing the most fundamental point of all: Professor 
>Neiman does not engage the DNA evidence. Instead, he engages the 
>apparent coincidences between Sally Hemings's conceptions and TJ's 
>sporadic presences at Monticello. He professes to have used statistical 
>science to prove that the coincidences prove that TJ fathered six 
>Hemings children. 
> 
>
>The DNA evidence does figure into the Neiman study, but only insofar as 
>the nonstatistical threads of the pro-paternity argument are -- or so 
>Dr. Neiman says, anyway -- germane in his application of something 
>called Bayes's theorem. He applies that to the=2
>0results of the computer 
>simulations with which he started his study. 
> 
>
>In this matter, Dr. Neiman was working as a scientist, precisely in 
>order to invoke science's special authority within a humanities debate. 
>But his scientific report "Coincidence or Causal Connection? The 
>Relationship between Thomas Jefferson’s Visits to Monticello and Sally 
>Hemings’s Conceptions” appeared in a leading humanities journal, 
>sequestered from the scrutiny of other scientists. 
> 
>
>Professor Neiman is a distinguished scholar, and statistical science is 
>an important tool for him and his colleagues. See for example the 
>description from his Web site for the course "Analytical Methods in 
>Archaeology" (http://people.virginia.edu/~fn9r/anth588/index.html). 
>Excerpt: "This course examines quantitative analytical techniques used 
>in archaeology. Topics include, regression, smoothing, correlation, 
>measures of diversity and distance, spatial autocorrelation and Mantel 
>methods, seriation, ordination, and clustering." 
> 
>
>So there's no mystery about his qualifications. In his dual roles at 
>U.Va. and Monticello, he's obviously superbly qualified. The mystery, in 
>my view since 2000 when this all started, is what caused him to become 
>so supremely confident that he could actually use statistical science to 
>resolve a two-century-old sex mystery for which the evidence is so 
>fragmentary anyhow. 
> 
>
>Steven T. (Steve) Corneliussen 
>
>Poquoson, Virginia 
> 
>
>______________________________________ 
>
>To subsc
>ribe, 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
>
>  
>

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