DNA Ethnicity Results Aren't What You Think 

Chris Edwards Or because saxons and danes are almost the same group.

I'm not too sure about the historical demographics but I highly doubt that the Normans or Saxons invaded a depopulated land, if you know what I mean.

> being pale, dark blonde, blue eyed, tall, nordic italian. I think I must be quite celto-germanic since north italian is like Austria/France/Switzerland ethnically. MyHeritage says I'm 50% italian, 30% greek, 9% balcanic and only 9% north-western european. They say I am fully mediterranean. LMAO I took the gedmatch analysis, and indeed I understand now that MH considers swedish longobards as "italians" since they came in Italy during the middle ages. These are the *real* results: Caucasus 10.41 Southwest Asian 7.56 Mediterranean 28.14 Volga-Ural 5.63 South Baltic 5.70 Western European 25.40 North Sea 17.17 So now I have something that matches my phenotype with my genotype (half of my DNA is nordic). 89% southern european my ass

Autachyan Exactly, how can there be an Italian ethnicity? Tyroleans and Lombards in the north. Greeks in the heel. Normans in Sicily. And, stylishly well-dressed people all over. 😃

There is not italian ethnicity indeed! In the north we are celto-germanic (basically we are like swiss and french) and in the south they are arab-phoenician-greeks and some roman in both.

Thanks John, I used that line today in a class I was teaching.

I found my ancestors living on the Mohegan Indian Reserve from 1664-until post Civil war. So of course, we had "Native high Cheekbones" and a propensity to marry into native mixed families that includes Cornplanter Chief Joseph Brant stretched out to its extremities. So when My sisters DNA showed ZERO native 1% Jewish and 1% Polynesian I was shocked. This explains the problem of ance-stors at 10 and 13 generations losing their Maternal DNA for a European(R1b) Male population that eventually overwhelmed their haplogroup.

My Cherokee ancestor was NOT a "princess"! Getting tired of hearing that crap. However, she was of high status in the Cherokee nation. Otherwise, they would probably not have convinced her that it was "fashionable" (at that time) for a high status Cherokee to marry a Celt. (She married my Scottish ancestor.)

@Steve Hanlon I'm R1b Western European (Saxon) however they stated on my old DNA test that I was mostly 60% or better Western Irish , more Irish than nearly half of the people now born in Ireland today. How Odd I thought, Im from people who crossed the Atlantic very shortly after the Mayflower on my Dads side and Pure Anglo-Saxon-Norman on my Moms side. So where did all these Irish get into my genealogy? I guess mostly in the Maiden names of the wives of which many are largely missing exceptions being Kavennah and Hayes, very Irish roots.

LMAO... Oh you are so right. My family had the same claims so I took the Autosome, Y-67 DNA, and the mtDNA tests from FamilyTree, Plus the AncestryDNA, 23andMe and National Geographic --- and you can guess what all those results consistently show: 0% not a trace of Native Blood. Well there goes that family myth :-)

also why ancestry's test seems more accurate

Does Coca Cola cross reference their ingredients with Pepsi and RC Cola?

@@blifx can you explain how ancestry's test is more accurate than the other companies?

@@mdrahman6732 because they have bigger database

That's why people are using GedMatch.

That's the idea, you get a general idea of where you're from.

well, i can give you a general idea for half price...

my friend took dna tests from 4 different companies, each result was drastically different

he took tests from both ancestry and 23nme

Frank Winkhorst He is upset, becaus he is a 200% white

Studies into non paternal events have found anywhere from 1% to 15+% of named fathers are not the biological father. If you have done genetic genealogy for any length of time, you'll find out about it.

@@FamilyHistoryFanatics yes but they've also been known to skip too.

This is called Other Than Expected Father or OTEF.

People are matching ancient DNA Sites.

Omg LMMFAO

Thank you

How much DNA do you have from Archaic Humans and Extinct Human Species! - Gedmatch Tool ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cRRrYIONcUk.html

What is Y-DNA? Can it help you find your ancestors? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0MOEHv1g84E.html

Answered on FHFLive: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pVml0P134wE.html

True so much travel through commerce, wars and slavery around the globe many peoples have moved around ... always.

Did a DNA test on my granddaughter at her birth (2008) in order to help pediatrician's awareness of genetic diseases as I did not know her father. Showed 6% Native American, which made sense as my mother-in-law was NA, so NA on maternal side confirmed. Retook granddaughter's DNA in 2020 (different company) and WHOA, NA was determined to be 0.1% The whole thing makes me crazy. Glad I have so much paper genealogy on granddaughter's maternal side...The paternal side will remain a mystery until granddaughter turns 18 and her mother tells her who her father is. There is a long discussion we could have about keeping birth secrets.

Similar here, first analysis has since changed. Originally I had some trace Japanese and African, now I'm not as interesting as I once was.

KeyboardWarrior thats true keyboard warrior

Especially as they use such vague terms such as middle eastern, European, African ect. The middle east and north Africa were conquered by turks and arabs, so don't have any real meaning today. European is too vague also as we know eastern or western, British and iberia ect are different ethnicities.

Andrew Fishburn no we don’t know that. Mideast is Mideast Europe is Europe Africa is Africa and if you do not know the origins of Russia you are lost and misleading people. Then you get into the aches of races and some involuntary mixing in early history. Stop teaching what the communist schools of evolution have indoctrination acted you in.

Petro Krasnov There are many ethnicities within Britain and Europe. What I said is perfectly true and backed up by genetics. No communist indoctrination here.

The most surefire thing you can get from a DNA test is your haplogroup. At least with that, you can determine a general region you're from based on the sub-clade. Saying that you're specifically 70% x and 30% y, however, is rather tricky.

A lot of dough for a grain of salt !

John NY there is a huge difference between Gospel and a grain of salt. These DNA tests correctly identify close relatives. Ans less correctly identify distant relatives. Which makes the accuracy closer to Gospel than the grain of salt. If you had a person listed as your grandfather due to documentation, but the DNA test shows that he is not related, the DNA test may reveal an adoption or other circumstance.

Classymaru Nara I don't believe one word of it

Thankful to have done geneology research the old fashioned way for decades. The documentation became even more useful after getting dna's vague/broad results. For instance, a Western Europe conclusion doesn't tell me much. Ancestry.com does list the Western Europe possibilities but from that alone how do I know exactly what one is relevant to me? At least this dna test doesn't say; however, documents compiled over the years such as ship's logs and census records do narrow the conclusion. Summary: my research gave me more precise information, the DNA results confirmed I'm on the right track.

Leona147741, I was talking about the ethnicity estimates.

yup

Did Ancestry dna. My dad was over 1 half French Canadian. I have all the ancestors and their birthplace and names going back to France. I received 0 French ancestry. I have 19 percent northwest Europe centered mostly in England and Channel Islands and 24 percent scottish, 15 percent irish 8 percent wales. Where did the French go?

Quite true with the Scandinavian part of your comment. For the later half, refer to this video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ScZtHuU78n4.html

Exactly this

The UK has no idea how Scandianvian it is. Interestingly enough, the Scandinavians know very well their connection to Britain, which is why so many of them have such an affinity for the place.

good one

He has cartoon character DNA

Peter Griffin is Irish.

Nick Kraw peter griffin is actually black aswell

Grubert Chubbiecawké lmao

So it was good? Which ethnicities did you have? Im bulgarian and want to buy a kit myself

Same here, I have no doubt my DNA results are accurate

They only follow your mom

Lol having your name and birthday info is enought to access your files. They will probably use your free sample for other things.

@@africanfitnessconcept I expect you to have learned a little about science now that it's a year later. Just the level of ignorance you're spitting is scary. Oh, I was born in 1996 in Cape Town, South Africa, and my name is as it is in my username. You may now access my files and know my ethnicity breakdown, origins, health insights, intelligence estimate, and physical traits (yes, they can determine that by your DNA, the more advanced companies usually do it)! After taking a DNA test, you can download your raw DNA data in which you can then upload it to other genealogy sites for further insights and analysis, and believe it or not, it is still equally accurate even if you're not using your real name or birthday!!

Can you explain what you mean further? The ethnicity results are not set in stone. If they tell you that your ancestors are from Europe or Africa then your ancestors (at least the portion whose DNA you have) were from Europe and Africa, but if you already knew you were African-American then you probably knew this origin of your ancestors already. If they say your ancestors were from Belgium and Senegal, then I would take a step back and start to ask how they got so specific. I haven't been convinced that the country level ethnicity results are accurate.

Family History Fanatics most AA have a large admixture due to slave owners and slaves having children which would make us more than just African and from my admixture my non African ancestors are French/German , Scottish and Spanish. Also in slavery their were mixtures of slaves Fri. different areas and it goes on. It helps us understand our history . Not all if us arrived off if the Mayflower and have a papertrail from then to now. Please consider that before responding. Alot of AA doesn't know where they're from (genealogically). So this gives us something to go on and start the hunt for who we are and from whom we descended.

Many groups the world over have similar mixing, by force or by choice. As you pointed out, a lot of mixing took place even from populations in Africa between slaves. Our point is always, DNA can trace ethnicity back to the continental level accurately. DNA will identify close relations with confidence. When attempting to identify specific regions, countries or cities, DNA accuracy drops dramatically.

Family History Fanatics I know exactly but when someone who looks not mixed has 23% Euro I think they could have had Black family in Europe

Family History Fanatics can’t trace my heritage back accurately because I don’t know my father. Zero information about him. Not everyone has this ability to trace stuff back

russians are ost-baltic race = sub-mongoloids.

Varangian - Second language is officially Swedish. But we're not Scandinavian. Just Finnish. Perkele :-)

Well, Finland DOES belong to what is called Scandinavia, but the language is more related (or at least has common roots with) to Turkish and Hungarian. So it's not a Scandinavian language. Maybe that makes Finland NOT Scandinavian?

@The Varangian from Pycь Nope, official second language is Swedish.

Finnish people are Chinese.

Mine didn't. According to my genealogy my family have been in England at least 500 years. We have a Saxon surname. DNA claimed we were Irish. Tried a different company and it said we're Irish and Scottish. I have a couple of Irish and Scottish ancestors in my genealogy but the vast majority of us are English. I would understand if I had mostly broadly northwest European but I didn't get any of that. My DNA matches were mostly English and our family trees match up. Researching further I found we are related to the Cheddar Man, pre-Celtic English. My best guess is when invaders came, my ancestors stayed in England and others left for Scotland and Ireland? The DNA doesn't match.

@NA Phiri Our family with the Saxon surname has genealogy dating us back to London in the 16th Century. While yes, he could have changed his surname, I doubt all of the women married into the family in that time were Scottish or Irish. We've been in the Greater London area for a very long, long time and other parts are mostly Devon and Somerset. I've matched a lot of our family tree with other peoples family tree. My first thought was that someone had slept around but the names match up. There aren't enough Irish and Scottish people marrying into the family for us to be mostly Irish and Scottish. We're not a grand family from a line of important people. Mostly just generations of working class, some craftsmen and some artisans. We have court records, church records, newspaper, guilds, census etc... If my family is matching up with other families, where is this mostly Scottish and Irish? What are we saying here? Most of London and southwest England are Irish and Scottish immigrants? Forgive me but Devon and Somerset aren't exactly known for drawing in immigrants with the vast wealth of their moors and tiny Exmoor ponies. I would expect at least some broadly northwestern European but we have none. And I expect lots of English and maybe a bit of Irish and Scottish. Both of these testing companies are out of whack.

I'm having trouble with that. All that's showing up is 4th cousin

Mine matches up with my tests, they coinside with my family story.. I did 23 and Ancestry. Pretty darn close. I dont understand dna. My question is my great great parents thru my mother thru her fathers mother was half Irish and have English because her mother was Ireland 🇮🇪 her father from England 🇬🇧 . So I am 9% English and Irish my Aunt was half and same English and Irish. So this adds up. But how can I distinguish from my matches who were related to my great greats???? Help, please and thank you!

@@runningfromabear8354 well most "Englishmen" are not descent from the "Anglo-Saxons" . I think you are confusing your results with history.

You're welcome. Glad to help. Hope you'll watch the others on our channel. And if you have a question or a video suggestion, don't hesitate to reach out.

While that is a funny image, I know just enough about math to be able to say it isn't the case. For instance, if that were the case, I would expect vastly differing results from my brothers and I. They weren't.

Marx Wade That is a hilarious mental image! I laughed 'til the tears rolled - I'm still laughing!

Marx Wade my brother (same parents) went through a different DNA service than me. My brother is a Central American Polish Turk. WTF?

Marx Wade - Actually, DNA transmission is a bit like that.

Yeap! Me too!

Neith Almighty I agree 100%. It’s funny watching these ancestry DNA videos and people truly believing they are X percent, like it is factual.

Exactly

I knew about my family history and my DNA results were right even down to the quite small part of Britain and Europe both sides of my family were from.

Yes, I think if you take it as a list of your ethnicities and mostly this or that, the tests are pretty accurate. If you try to be literal that you are 18 or 33 percent of something, you may notice a lot more descrepancies. His results were similar at a macro level.

@@KatieBellino If your ancestors were from all over, then yeah, I'd say that depending on how great their sources for comparison are, they probably could match up exact percentages of one's DNA with different populations and come to exact numbers. Whether we are able to determine it or not, logically we should inherit mathematically exact amounts of DNA from both parents. I'm just some dirt bag talking out of his ass with no actual education, but I'd imagine that we physically inherit DNA molecules from our parents/ancestors that can technically, like all physical matter in this universe in theory, be calculated. Right? So it would make sense that if genetic inheritance is random to some degree, and that some of your ancestor's/your DNA can literally miss the boat on the next trip out of the sea of sperm that is in a man's nut sack and be lost forever with your death, then some DNA may not show up. And if people intermarried from different genetic populations, then yeah, in theory we should be able to determine the exact percentages of how much DNA you inherited from each specific population that your different ancestors came from. If we are actually capable of doing that through these tests, I can only assume we can or else we are definitely getting ripped off. lol.

I hope as millions of more people are tested that the ethnicity results can become "accurate" but I'll wait until the statistics show they are before I recommend the results.

We are better known as Aboriginals, and we do have tribes, such as mine Seminole. I am not African American, I am not Native American, I am Seminole.

Please do.

Definitely do a test. Test your Mom as well. Then in your matches look for those that match you but not your mom. These would be on your father's side and connecting with them might help you understand your bio-dad more.

Thank you for your reply! My mom had actually gotten me a DNA kit since I discussed it with her, but I had wanted the 23&me since that one actually has a medical side to it as well. Not knowing the family history also means not knowing the family medical history- which means things have been a bit frustrating to help get diagnoses or just getting better ideas of what medical issues I could be facing in the future. However, my mom had gotten me an AncestryDNA kit. It is likely cheaper than the 23&me kit, but I likely should do a comparison test with my mom with the same testing company, shouldn't I? Thanks again for your reply and your videos.

You can upload the results from both kits to Gedmatch.com which is free. For medical information, check out promethease.com.

Good advice. One reason paper research will show this is beyond your 3rd Great Grandparent, there are some people who you are not related to. That's just how DNA works.

@ladeirose S , Kind of disagree with your 1st part of your comment. You are probably or might be right on your family but doubt your correct on many other people ancestry. God but think you are 100% so right on your last part on what you said on how boundary lines change and also lost countries like Yugoslavia now. My 1 parent family side is from northern Italy and my other parent family is from southern Italy. When I did my DNA, I was very surprised to find out like I am 16% French in me and with a few other things. So now I think it explains on why many people told me my whole life that I don't look 100% Italian like I was always told. And I know for a fact I was not adopted etc... cause way too many other similarities with many other family members. Lots of these especially older Italian people in my family flipped out from this. I do know they are going by on what other older family ancestors told them. And after doing research on this makes sense to me in my case. The French and France use to own or control especially northern Italy. Think that happen during or before Napolean days. And also seen on old maps that showed France was much bigger back than what we know it as today or past 100 or 1,000 years and covered big part of northern Italy. And from last I read on it is, don't think France owned it but France even actually controlled big part of southern Italy even down in Naples's area.

I did both Ancestry and 23andMe. I have a fair amount of paper record. 33sndMe was quite accurate. I am not sure I would trust it for trace ancestry but if they shade a part of a country in a dark shade you can be sure you have ancestors from that country.

You're too kind.

Exactly. People's expectations (and how much emphasis they put on these ethnicity/admixture results) needs to change. That happens by sharing the message and educating people.

Yes, each has their own reference populations. I'll be doing a video on these in the future to help explain them better.

Any of them. All of them are equally good (but not necessarily accurate).

Thanks so much

thats the same thing mostly

Glad you like it.

I think you're on the right path. Take DNA tests to solve genealogical questions or help others do the same. The ethnicity results aren't as valuable or accurate as people thing.

Thanks for that great comment. Ethnicity/Admixture is the least useful and least accurate information one can get from a DNA test.

This is what people don't understand about modern dna testing. They are only going to show if you match the population they are using for Iberian or Europe West. They aren't looking at deep ancestry or admixture in these populations.

Also there is dna taken from bones from hundreds or even thousands of years ago in many regions & that is used to determine a person's ethnicity.

@@jackieblue1267 what you don't understand is that dna from old bones is compared with dna from modern day people from the region of where the bones were discovered.

@AJR - Companies like 23&Me, Ancestry don't use dna from ancient samples like Yamnaya, Rathlin, Hinxton etc samples etc. They use modern population samples. They are mainly geared to US populations who are trying to find their ancestry in the last few hundred years. You can get your results from 23&Me and Ancestry etc and download your results and run them through third party resources which can allow you to compare your dna to old samples and find out how much Yamnaya you are for example but 23&Me, Ancestry doesn't do this.

If ethnicity results are all you are interested in, any of the companies will work.

If it was the same chip, but 23andMe is on version 5 of there chip. I had tested on V3 of the chip which was the one that provided data for the most SNPs. Some of my family tested on V4 which is more in line with what AncestryDNA uses.

I would recommend getting both yourself and your brothers tested. If your parents are already deceased, then each of your siblings will have a unique combination of your parents DNA. By testing all of them you almost have a complete set of what your parents DNA would have looked like.

Doesn't matter if you're a woman or not , your DNA test will still show the DNA you inherited from both parents , I definitely recommend getting it done, your brother's will be slightly different but should still match the same ethnicity as you as long as you have the same parents

It should link you with your dad and any other close relatives profiles because that is straight one-one comparison of DNA. Ethnicity results are done using a different algorithm and completely unrelated to relative matching.

That's cool stuff.

Wow, my great grandfather moved to Pennsylvania, new Jersey in 1890 from Poland. I'll try to find the town of where he comes and see if it has something related with your family.

Thank's Norman's.

You are so welcome!

I agree completely. The point was to show that the results are not pinpoint precise and people who are changing from kilts to lederhosen because of a DNA test are missing the point.

@@FamilyHistoryFanatics Fair enough point. I agree with you, then. Thanks for helping me understand!

Maybe your father isn't yr bio dad. Hate to say that but its possible.

Ancestry tests were Italians biggest nightmares. You all tell everyone "Imma hundrit p'cent". Bullcrap! I love hearing Italian people back peddle when they get their results. Lol

Its about your gene pool...For example I could have a random jump and be lets say....4% korean but when my siblings or parents or even grandpartents take it they might not have any korean in them.

SomeSketchyDude 781 ... You missed the point maybe. I was having a laugh at all the Italians who want everyone on planet Earth to think they are 100% Italian.

Italian DNA doesn't exist. The Italian peninsula has been colonized or invaded by EVERYBODY in the world.

DNA depends on the questions you're asking. They can be useful in finding answers were no records exist.

Having DNA is extremely useful for people that were adopted and for people that have no idea about their family history, so it gives them a good clue of where to look for the records

Yes! Fairly recent ancestors is where DNA is the most helpful because at 2nd cousins and closer all share DNA with you and to such an extent that you can distinguish how they are related fairly easily.

Yes and no. You haven't inherited DNA from every ancestor. So, the DNA tests can only tell you about the ancestors you did inherit DNA from. Breaking up your ethnicity is done by comparing your DNA to reference populations. None of the companies' reference populations are large enough yet to give a definitive answer.

well some people have north african dna etc

+Mulberry2000 or vice versa. North Africans have European blood in them.

Moors and African Traders and Journeyman were a minsicule portion of the overall European population for the short time they interacted with portions of Europe before the Reconquista. However, point taken

Both Cleopatra and Helen were Greek....

@@ryan7864 the Arabs and the moors occupied the iberian pininsulla for 800 years before the Reconquista lol what do you mean by "a minsicule portion"?. You were basically our bitch back in the day

I would guess that you probably increased in those areas adjacent to Europe.

What a load of rubbish, I'm 2% Italian lol yet my cousin is 98%

Yes but in Africa it’s about tribes not countries

we all aware their are many in each country but during the Atlantic slave trade they were all bunch together all west africa was colonize from cameroon nigeria mali congo ect

@@jl2284123 yes I know but the Igbo tribe is very much different from the akan tribe

Yes, it is in the works.

if these DNA readings are taking into account the past 200 years only then surely it would rule out the anglo saxons arriving in the 600s and the vikings too, they would just show up as British ethnicity right? Personally myself being half British half Peruvian it was interesting to see 70% welsh/irish blood, 19% native andean american and 3% african (from senegal, mali and congo, all countries that were heavily involved in the slave trade), the rest were Spanish/French and German and even 1% jewish (I assume Sephardic Jew). I assume my mum being mestiza (half native half european like most the population there) had Irish blood in her, or if it was the same Spanish group that allegedly migrated to ireland during the end of the armada. being 3/4 european I have white skin but I feel like I look Mediterranean european can't really see any northern european features apart from something in the eyes they are greeny, white genes seem very weak, anyone with 60% or less european doesn't look even close to white to me, personally I don't agree with the promotion of mix racing either way but it's pretty cool to see I'm a walking historic genome of western colonisation

I like being able to tell people the good and the bad with every company and the results that they get.

I would take the DNA test, not for the ethnicity results, but for the cousin matching. DNA is a record of relationships and can connect us with cousins that a paper trail might not.

I'll consider that. Thanks!

Adam Ruins Everything. I love that show. If you have any contacts with College Humor, tell them about me.

Yeah, you are the Rodney Dangerfield of DNA. " I tell ya, my DNA gets no respect, no respect at all".

The one that has the largest reference set for the places that your ancestors actually are from. 23andMe has the largest reference set, but where your ancestors actually are from is an unknown. So you can't really tell which one will give the most reliable result beforehand.

Since your other family members have a large amount of similar DNA to you, it is not suprising that the results they received line up with your results. Ancestry is using their algorithms and are consistent in saying that such and such DNA is from such and such place. From a continental level, they are correct (along with every other testing company). However, there is so much disparity when you look at the regional and country level between companies and none of them have made a strong enough case that their algorithms are the most accurate - otherwise we would see a coalescing around one standard for analysis.

Their estimates lined up exactly with what we know of my family tree. They even narrowed it down to a single county in Munster, Ireland based on my "cousin matches" before I had started creating my family tree with them. Which was totally 100% correct. Perhaps it works better for Europeans than for Americans due to the sheer amount of admixture in American people? Same for my mate, he's 25% Polish, 25% Irish and 50% English and aside from a 2% Scandinavian thrown in there those figures are pretty much exactly what came up. I really think it's just the fact that American DNA is so mixed up it's hard to pinpoint exact places etc.

I've researched this subject quite a bit, and Ancestry.com is actually one of the least accurate. 23 and Me is the one most geneticists will swear by as the best of the commercial tests, with Ftdna being another one. However Ancestry.com's test is the best for connecting to relatives as they have the largest database of users. The newcomer, Myheritage DNA, is an interesting case because their founder populations are based on their extensive use of their user's genealogical trees...they claim to have the most regions of all the tests out there... All this said, I've not used 23&me...but have uploaded my Ancestry.com results to Ftdna and Myheritage, and all 3 are so different, I now just claim to be European... they're just too different from each other. I know I can say, without a doubt that I'm 3-5% Caucasus region (Turkic Armenian, Iranian, Syrian, etc..) because that % is in all 3 results...but Ancestry has me at nearly 90% British, Ftdna at 56% Scandinavian, Myheritage has me at a mix that matches up with my genealogy the best...except it gives me 7.5% Italian/Greek lineage, but the other two test don't have any Italian/Greek.

Joel Waechter i concur!. These tests are atleast 95% accurate. ~its just sometimes people get thrown a curve when thier family rumors come out to be simply JUST rumors

Joel Waechter Could the results be affected by how many countries each test has tested on? I see on their respective websites that ancestrydna only has 35 countries while 23andme has 54.

Glad you're not disappointed. You're among the few with your view on the results. Keep it up. We need more like you in the community.

You're welcome. Come back again

That's great. DNA is a record of relationships, and genealogists love to have more records.

I appreciate your response. Thanks for sharing.

You are welcome.

I did an ancestry test and it showed British ancestry not Irish

Thanks for sharing. Glad your husband and I agree

Yes! Scotland first, Ireland second (where I am from) Also loads of gingers in Australia, because loads of people from the UK immigrated to Australia (sometimes not by choice though sadly). Gingers are all over the globe but YES most of them can be found in Scotland.

I read somewhere that red hair came from the Vikings.

Altheavpc that's what they say, the Scottish island with the most redheads is pretty close to Scandinavia, of course my DNA looks like someone from the Orkney island or Norway or Iceland(via Gedmatch and DNA land) with a dash of Moldova.Im a ginger. But I also tan. A little, lol.

donald loudermilk I think it is probably as percentage of the population, since due to the Scottish diaspora, the US likely has more redheads in over all numbers. But relative to the population size, Scotland is by the far the largest and if they scaled up Scotland’s population to the same as the US, then the number of redheads would completely dwarf anywhere else.

no, its russia

I'm glad you appreciated my video.

Your welcome

Joe Duke my comment has nothing to do with Marxism that was my point that you don't understand and I do Step up your game

Never thought that Marxism and Feminism would be a debate topic on a genealogy channel. But I'm wrong lots of times, so why not on this point.

@@FamilyHistoryFanatics This is youtube so people will debate about anything on any channel, 90% of the people who watched this video probably clicked it 10 seconds after watching some other video on subjects as varied as why radical feminists are trying to destroy humanity to a man sitting staring at the camera silent for 8 hours (a real thing this guy does every fucking day).

Italians had to have come from somewhere, and most likely whoever became the italians, interbred with the Greeks since they are on the way to Italy from most everywhere else in the Mediteranean. Also, the Greeks had several city states on the Italian peninsula when Rome was just beginning so there was probably a lot of intermixing even in ancient times.

What you are saying is true and Sicily and Southern Italy is close to Greek but he rest of Italy is different. But I suppose that is true for all countries and regions.

Correct!! Even travelling through Italy, which I have done many times, from Bari in the south to the border in the north travelling between Greece and luxembourg you can see the difference from south to north. And indeed when DNA test say Greek-Italian they mean the south of Italy. Just had my DNA done and nothing sepcatacular, exactly what I suspected. 65% Greek with a little Iberian, Moroccan, Ottoman and Sudanese.

Not too sure about that and was not able to confirm on the internet but the truth will eventually come out; regardless I do not have issue with having African DNA.

Daniel Natal There are some flaws with your theory. The desertification of the Sahara is a rather recent. For several hundred thousand years,The Sahara has alternated between desert and savanna grassland in a 41,000 year cycle caused by changes ("precession") in the Earth's axis as it rotates around the sun, which change the location of the North African Monsoon. It is next expected to become green in about 15,000 years (17,000 AD). So there were periods where navigation of the Sahara was easier than others. One of the oldest boats in the world is Dufuna canoe found in Nigeria. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dufuna_canoe Blacks were not extraordinarily isolated from the rest of the world. They just interacted more with North Africans and Middle Eastners. The Aksum empire for example traded with China,India,and etc way before Arabs invaded North Africa in the 630s. Aksum was deeply involved in the trade network between India and the Mediterranean (Rome, later Byzantium), exporting ivory, tortoise shell, gold and emeralds, and importing silk and spices. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Aksum As for West Africa centralized states and civilizations to formed starting with with Dhar Tichitt that began in 1600 B.C. although in Mauritania, there exist archaeological sites in the towns of Tichit and Oualata that were initially constructed around 2000 B.C., and were found to have originated from the Soninke branch of the Mandé peoples. They interacted with Berber further up North. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa Sub Sahara Africa is the most genetically diverse region on Earth. There are larger genetic Differences within Africans than between Africans and Eurasians. www.genetics.org/content/161/1/269 www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090430144524.htm Recent genetic data has found Neanderthal DNA in various parts of Sub Sahara due to a gene flow of Eurasians moving back into Africa ethnic groups with Neanderthal DNA are West Africans like the Yourba and the south Africans groups like the San. www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/dn24988-humanitys-forgotten-return-to-africa-revealed-in-dna/amp/

Any of them.

Agreed that it has improved, agreed that there is sampling bias. But all of these things together mean that no company should be reporting ethinicity results to a single decimal place. The general population assumes that indicates a degree of accuracy that simply isn't there.

Family History Fanatics Yes, kinda of like the race argument,the differences between populations are real but where you draw the line is arbitrary.

You found that I did do a review on CRI Genetics. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XEwSfmHTP-Q.html

You are welcome.

Are you Haitian or Dominican?

How companies determine your relationships and how they determine a ethnic makeup (or admixture) are two very different processes and algorithms. The relationship process is very straightforward. You are looking at the total amount of shared DNA and for distant relationships, how many segments are shared. I would guess that AncestryDNA identified you two as siblings even before you linked them on a tree. DNA can do that for close relationships (up to the 2nd cousin level) almost perfectly (half relationships and double relationships can muddy the waters but there aren't many of those overall). However for the ethnicity makeup, companies have to look at small segments of your DNA and classify them into whichever categories they have. Between you and your brother, they would some of those segments came from one grandparent (through your father or mother) and some came from another grandparent. On average, you share about 50% of your DNA with your brother, so there is 50% that the companies are looking at and trying to make a determination of where it is from. The ethnicity/admixture results are only as good as the data base of reference population that each company has (which is on the order of 10,000 samples). To truly be accurate, they would need to have a reference population set in the millions. That is a long way off. None of the testing companies do a good job of explaining to the public what the ethnicity results really mean. If they did, it would take too long, most people would tune out, and then no one would test (and the results would never get better).

Just because your brothers doesn't mean you share the same DNA. So like if you have a full Irish parent and a parent who is 100percent Italian then you can inherit 50% from each and be irish/Italian while your brother could say just get 100% of irish

No, you get 50% of your DNA from your mother and 50% from your father. So you and your brother would both be Irish/Italian. While it is theoretically possible to inherit a completely different 50% from your mother and father than your brother, statistically this on the order of 1 chance in trillions, which for all practical purposes for the human time frame is zero. So, because you are brothers, you share about 50% of the same DNA. This can be seen from Blaine Bettinger's Shared cm Project (thegeneticgenealogist.com/2016/06/26/update-to-the-shared-cm-project/) where siblings are clustered around 2600cm (which when accounting for shared cm on both chromosomes is 50%).

Yeah looking at mine and my sisters you would see a similar thing but to a smaller extent. It 100% makes since tho. I got 6% of my dads Scandinavian - my sister like 18. I am mainly British, my sister Irish. She is way more evenly mixed and i am not lol. But i have more regions.

David Williams why dont you file a law suit against it then?

GEDmatch is an awesome website. The interface is not user friendly, but the tools are amazing. I use it a lot. E-M4254 is your paternal haplogroup, basically where your Y chromosome came from.

@@FamilyHistoryFanaticsI am African American haplogroup is E-M4254 It is a sub clad of E1b1a or E1b1b .Which group?

That I don't know. There has been a lot of shuffling of haplogroups as new information is found (including changing the nomenclature). You'd have to dig into a haplogroup tree and look at some of the naming history to determine which one it is.

Sounds like a plan.

And me white! I’m also sticking proudly to that!

@@justineshroomyhardy7309 😆👍

Unfortunately, the DNA testing companies are not in the business of teaching geopolitics. They use the names of geopolitics that roughly align and so rather than trying to invent my own names I follow their naming conventions and try to decipher how they may line up between companies.

Yes, because there aren't many good native american (particularly US tribes) reference databases.

Even then I have people be careful with the matches. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XOJN7xUTRmg.html