I really need help with this DNA question please!?
According to Mendel’s Second Law, in the cross-breeding of homozygous individuals concerning two pairs of unlinked alleles, AABB x aabb, where A= right handed (A) verse left handed (a) and B= brown (B) verses blond (b) hair. What are the genotypic proportions of the possible offspring? What are the phenotypic proportions of the possible offspring?
The GENEALOGY OF JESUS?
The genealogy in Matthew is actually the genealogy of Joseph. The genealogy in Luke is that of Mary. There are several reasons for this. Matthew is a book written to Jews to prove Jesus' deity and position as Messiah. It was through the Virgin birth that this would be done. Therefore important to show that Mary too descended through the line of David. Luke is a book written to a different audience. The genealogy there is to show that Jesus is the right heir of David. Two parents... two genealogies. Also... and this is the best part... God announced very early that His plan for redemption involved the Messiah being brought forth from the tribe of Judah, and specifically from the line of David. The succession of subsequent kings proved to be, with only a few exceptions, a dismal chain. As the succeeding kings of Judah went from bad to worse, we eventually encounter Jeconiah (also known as Jehoiachin), upon whom God pronounces a " blood curse" : "Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah."(Jeremiah 22:30) This curse created a rather grim and perplexing paradox: the Messiah had to come from the royal line, yet now there was a "blood curse" on that very line of descent! (I always visualize a celebration in the councils of Satan on that day. But then I imagine God turning to His angels, saying, "Watch this one!") The Solution The answer emerges in the differing genealogies of Jesus Christ recorded in the gospels. Matthew, as a Levi, focuses his gospel on the Messiahship of Jesus and presents Him as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah. Thus, Matthew traces the legal line from Abraham (as any Jew would) through David, then through Solomon (the . royal. line) to Joseph, the legal father of Jesus. On the other hand, Luke, as a physician, focuses on the humanity of Jesus and presents Him as the Son of Man. Luke traces the blood line from Adam (the first Man) through to David -- and his genealogy from Abraham through David is identical to Matthew's. But then after David, Luke departs from the path taken by Matthew and traces the family tree through another son of David (the second surviving son of Bathsheba), Nathan, down through Heli, the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Genealogical question...distant descendant?
"Descendant" usually means child, grandchild, great grandchild ... To my ear, "direct descendant" is a tautology, like "pizza pie" or "deadly fatal". But, Wikipedia makes these distinctions: Lineal descendant, a blood relative in the direct line of descent Collateral descendant, a relative descended from a brother or sister of an ancestor So, you are a "Collateral descendant" of her. If it was me, I'd say she was my 3rd or 4th great aunt, since 9 out of 10 people you brag to aren't going to know what a "Collateral descendant" is.
What would a person who records history and genealogy to back up claims to land, water, etc be called?
the person who did the research would simply be a researcher. A genealogical researcher or Genealogists concentrates on the genealogical records which may or may not include land records. I have never hear of a specific name or title for someone that performed that type of research.
How far back does genealogy actual count?
I just found out my mother spent a lot of money on ancestry.com and other sites to trace our ancestry. except for the first 4 generations back, none of the rest make any since. It seems when she came across an ancestor she also would trace there siblings and cousins ancestry dating back thousands of years, thus creating a huge mess of a family tree. one of these papers says we're related to Pocahontas, you go back far enough and not only trace maternal & paternal lineage, but also their relatives, pretty much everybody is related to Pocahontas, a German king, a french king, Genghis khan, etc. What I want to know is, genetically. how far back does an ancestor actually matter & how are you suppose to go about searching through your genealogy? Like, is it just a few generations back or a few hundred or is it thousands of generations back? I & everyone else in the family who are very confused and irritated by these mess of papers, would like to be able to either sort through this stuff to either get to the real family genealogy or discredit it all and know we need to start over to find out our true ancestry. I hope I gave enough information and asked all the right questions, can't wait to hear back! :)
In genealogy, what is considered the correct source for names; records, gravestones, or obituaries?
Depends what you mean by "correct". My husband's great-grandfather's birth was registered as Obadiah Thomas Lastname. His death was registered as Thomas Obadiah Lastname (and various other sources use one or the other).My own grandfather was born William James Lastname but his mother died when he was small and his father couldn't cope - the three children went into an orphanage for a while and by the time he retrieved them he'd clearly forgotten the details of their names as my grandfather was William Henry from that point on. His own son and grandson were named William Henry after him and it wasn't until he'd been dead for several decades that the William James thing came out.I have another forebear who was born Florence Edith Lastname. Her father died when she was a child and she went to live with her much older half-brother. He already had a daughter named Florence so from that point on in all records 'my' Florence is recorded as Edith Florence, even after she'd left home and gone out into the world.[*]Each of these name variants is 'correct' for a certain value of 'correct'. Each is a snapshot of a name used in some circumstances. And taken together they can tell (or at least suggest) a story of changing circumstances over a life. In the UK you can legally use any name you like so it's not even true to say that only one variant is the 'legal' name.How you record these cases is another matter. Personally I use the most official source I can find for the birth as the primary name for an individual and record any other variants as variant names. If I can't find a good source close to the date of birth then I use my discretion to choose what to use as the primary name, but still record all the different variants as variant names unless they are obviously just misspellings.[*] Actually I can't remember right now (haven't worked on that family group in a while) whether it was Edith or Ethel, or possibly something else. But it was something along those lines. I'll double-check if I get a chance.
What is another name for the genealogy in Matthew 1:1-16?
RECORD It's even in the scripture This is a record of the birth of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Matthew 1:1 The book of the generation - This is the proper title of the chapter. It is the same as to say, "the account of the ancestry or family, or the genealogical table of Jesus Christ." The phrase is common in Jewish writings. Compare Genesis 5:1. "This is the book of the generations of Adam," i. e., the genealogical table of the family or descendants of Adam. See also Genesis 6:9. The Jews, moreover, as we do, kept such tables of their own families. and it is probable that this was copied from the record of the family of Joseph.
Genealogist conderrick each other? also advice here?
Another question with genealogy. When I was in high school I lived with a genealogist. She helped take care of me. Anyways, I really didn't pay much attention but she told my dad's side, the last name, she traced them to them Mayflower. That were relatives. I never asked any questions or got paperwork but it explained what my grandfather said to me. Anyways I moved after high school and she moved to another state. We lost contact. Another one of my releatives either got paper work from the archives or had a genealogist do the tree. Anyways the results say two different things. I'm having my relative send me the copies. I think I already found the error but I'm waiting for the copies of the papers to be sent. My relatives paper list the wrong Charles and that is not my gg grandmothers name. Also the newpaper article which has been passed down the famliy conderdicks this too. Also is this normal for genealogist to conerdick each other?
Do genealogy programs allow entries for people who have three or more biological parents?
I'm not a scientist, so I had to look into this. I am assuming that the children you refer to, who have "three or more biological parents", are products of an IVF technique that uses a carrier egg from another mother. If so, why would you expect to know the identity of the carrier egg donor? That is a potential ethics debate. Should the donor of the carrier egg be identified? Should the carrier have any parental rights? If they don't have rights, should they be identified for genealogical reasons? Intersting question.