Re: DNA results vs records #dna
Expanding a bit on Adam's excellent reply: whether your ancestors were Jewish or not, what it comes down to is that geography is not genetic, no matter what Ancestry and the other DNA companies would have you believe. I think the reference sample databases would need to be at least an order of magnitude bigger -- and more carefully researched! -- for DNA to be able to reliably tell apart neighboring populations, and to reduce the false pattern-population associations that currently plague the genre, but even then, migration will always mess up the urge to label populations geographically.toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
The recent revisions on Ancestry are a case in point: they used to put my mom as nearly all Eastern European, a broad but basically accurate category. The new estimate gives her 5% Scotland, which is so ridiculous I don't have the words. It's worse than MyHeritage's preposterous 6.3% Scandinavian.
The admixture estimates part of the DNA landscape is still "for entertainment value only"; I used to describe MH as the clown of the show, but I think with Ancestry's latest update, I'm going to have to revise that.