MnSpring wrote on 10/15/18 at 12:55:14:


Nice name calling - funny that coming from the likes of you mn...

At any rate, I was trying to insinuate that mark was "reaching for straws".  But there was a typo on my part.

Thanks for pointing it out.

FIFY

Have you not heard that phrase before?  Do you know what that means?

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 10/15/18 at 13:44:42:


So, then what is zero?  If she was lying, then it would be zero, wouldn't it?

You just mad 'cause she wasn't lying, or?....

Well, there is this.....

According to a report by the Boston Globe, there is no Native American DNA available for genetic testing “because Native American leaders have asked tribal members not to participate in genetic databases.”

Therefore, in order to test for Native American ancestry, genetic researchers have to use samples from other parts of the world.

Carlos D. Bustamante, a Stanford University professor, used samples from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia to attempt to calculate how much Native American ancestry is in Warren’s DNA.

“To make up for the dearth of Native American DNA, Bustamante used samples from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia to stand in for Native American. That’s because scientists believe that the groups Americans refer to as Native American came to this land via the Bering Strait about 12,000 years ago and settled in what’s now America but also migrated further south,” the Boston Globe explained.

According to the American Indian and Alaska Native Genetics Resource Center, no DNA test can “prove” that someone is

WebsterMark wrote on 10/15/18 at 14:13:25:


Then what?  No DNA evidence?  Is the DNA service lying?  According to birth records and reports, she's 1/32 - but those records are only based on what the great-great-great grandmother and father have reported...


Yeah, they were probably liars too, right mark?

justin_o_guy2 wrote on 10/15/18 at 13:44:42:



why are you lying???   JOG!?  

the quote is "Correction: Due to a math error, a story about Elizabeth Warren misstated the ancestry percentage of a potential 6th to 10th generation relative. The generational range based on the ancestor that the report identified suggests she’s between 1/64th and 1/1,024th Native American."

I added the bold, you left out the 6th to  and the 1/64th options...   cause you know, that's a RANGE and it's not that bad.... but you cherry picked what you wanted people here to believe...  trying to manipulate us into your favor...  

JOG the spin doctor!  Mr McSpinny Spinnerston,  yet he claims to seek the truth, which is why he just knows all the reality about all those "conspiracy" theories he peddles here.... He cant' even be true to himself.

I didn't lie.
I copied and pasted.
That's what was there.

Havalook
http://ace.mu.nu

MnSpring wrote on 10/15/18 at 14:35:50:


Yes, I am.

So?

T And T Garage wrote on 10/15/18 at 14:40:48:


Who's shokkt?
You believe Ford.