Post by morf13 on Mar 3, 2018 18:56:18 GMT
But a relative of his that came over here 100+ years ago, is a possibility. It doesn't narrow him down a lot other than to say he isn't black, spanish, indian, etc. Essentially it tells us he's a white guy.
Going back genealogically from the knowable information that people willing give, who are identifiable from the search Michelle did, likely would get back to the patrilineal ancestor 11 generations ago. British and American (German?) genealogical records are generally good. If the common patrilineal ancestor (MRCA) 11 generations ago is identified, then the genealogical reverses and goes forward in time. Subject to adoption etc., it should result in a list of perhaps a few thousand people. While that sounds daunting, and it isn't easy, many can be eliminated quickly. Lets say there are 4,000 descendants of the MRCA. About half will be female = 2,000 remaining. Maybe about 60% were not born between 1945 and 1961 = 800 remaining. Maybe 20% were living somewhere in California during the GSK years = 160 remaining. All of them should then be looked at. Even with the 160, and it could be a lot fewer, some would have criminal records, perhaps crimes that resemble those of GSK in some way. Obviously, those should be looked at first.
If the analysis done was only based on the Y chromosome, it really only shows that GSK's direct patrilineal line is European. It could show that the MRCA was German or French, or British as the origin of his Y chromosome. He could be part Spanish. I, for example, on Ancestry.com (I prefer 23andMe) show 11% Iberian DNA, but that is through a long ago migration of Iberian people to Ireland (the origin of the "Black Irish").
The use of Michelle's data doesn't end up with a massive number people to be looked at. Most would give voluntary DNA samples anyway.
BTW: I think his all leads to The Apprentice, unless there was an adoption or other event with a similar affect resulting in him not being found through genealogy.