The Trouble WIth Geneaolgy

The following is from  HumphrysFamilyTree.com

The genealogy site of Mark Humphrys 

I would like to disprove the basic concept that is being stated here.  They are trying to say genealogy is not genetic.  Somehow, genealogy is not a person's DNA.  Wait up a second, if we inherit our DNA from our parents and genealogy is the study of our family history- should it stand to reason that genealogy would be perfect way to study a person's genetics.  Actually speaking why would people believe that genealogy would be anything different.

Here is the fact, genealogy can be used to tear apart many of the ill conceived "truths" that are currently be taught today.

1. Humans have been on the earth for many millions of years.  If this were true, then why would there have been such a need for some many inter- marriages? The article would have you believe that we are all common descendants from people who lived 1500, 2000, and 3,000 years ago.  Our MCRA would be reached somewhere about 300 AD.  Now, look at the facts.  If we were millions of years old and more people live on the earth today then did in the past, our MCRA would have been hundred of thousands of years ago.  The fact that if you studied genealogy and note all of the inter-marriages you could easily ascertain that common relatives disproves evolution completely.   In fact, it makes it impossible to even be feasible.

Could this be why so many people don't believe in genealogy?  Is is too easy to believe that we are all related and our families are not important?  Or is this a much more insidious aspect to this claim.  Could they truly being honest when they claim the following.

 

This is not about DNA (Genealogy is not Genetics)

These findings do not necessarily have any implications for our DNA. To descend from someone does not mean you necessarily inherit any DNA from them. These findings do not conflict with the idea that most or all of your DNA is inherited from your local area. Even if you do descend from the Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs, that does not mean this can be detected in your DNA. In fact, there may be no evidence at all of these findings in humanity's DNA. And yet the findings can still be true. To see this, imagine one Western European sailor blown off course in classical times, say 100 AD, and landing in the Caribbean, with no way home. He is not killed but rather taken in by a tribe who need strong young men.

1. He mates with one of the native women and has children. 1/2 of their DNA is European.
2. The children mate with pure natives and have grandchildren. About 1/4 (can be more or less, by chance) of their DNA is European.
3. The grandchildren mate with pure natives and have great-grandchildren. About 1/8 (more or less) of their DNA is European.
4. And so on.

By 1492, all of the Caribbean is descended from him, but his DNA is extinct. There is no evidence of his existence in the DNA of the living. He is everyone's ancestor, but no one has his DNA. In summary, we are interested here in genealogical descent, not genetic descent.


Please look at it this way- the study of genealogy is the study of people- genetics makes up people.  Genetics is a great subset of genealogical information.