Julia Thompson wrote:
For example, how close I am to you? I imagine we might have
a common ancestral by 1600 or so.
Most of my ancestors at that point were in the British
Isles. to the best of my knowledge. A few were in France.
And those are the best candidates: France once
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
For example, how close I am to you? I imagine we might have
a common ancestral by 1600 or so.
Most of my ancestors at that point were in the British
Isles. to the best of my knowledge. A few were in France.
And those are the best
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
Actually, it's him, not her, and the two that make
my 126/128 instead of 128/128 are ancestors of his.
Oh, how I hate the Internet! Why there's no Humanity
Database with _all_ people that ever lived registered
in it, so that we can so
David Hobby wrote:
Julia Thompson wrote:
David Hobby wrote:
The above would have been easier to state if we had general kinship
terms based on degrees of genetic relatedness. Sibling, parent and
child are all halves. Grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece,
nephew,
David Hobby wrote:
The above would have been easier to state if we had general kinship
terms based on degrees of genetic relatedness. Sibling, parent and
child are all halves. Grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece,
nephew, half-sibling, and so on are quarters. And
David Hobby wrote:
David Hobby wrote:
The above would have been easier to state if we had general kinship
terms based on degrees of genetic relatedness. Sibling, parent and
child are all halves. Grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece,
nephew, half-sibling, and
Julia Thompson wrote:
David Hobby wrote:
The above would have been easier to state if we had general kinship
terms based on degrees of genetic relatedness. Sibling, parent and
child are all halves. Grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece,
nephew, half-sibling, and so on are
