Edward V11 - Prince of Pleasure" BBC2 at 9pm

[mobertol]

Originally Posted by garinda

Down my paternal grandmother's line, even though she could be a bit snooty about her Morton Hall links, none.

Down another line, via Pendle villages, and then through someone called Marmaduke Beckwith, directly back to King John.

Sounds odd, but was just lucky, because they didn't move around much for a couple of hundred years.

Though if you bear in mind that if you go back 1,000 years we all have literally tens of thousands of great grandparents many times removed, so half the country will have a direct link to Lackland too.

Nnety percent of us all will be in some way related.

Genetic studies have shown that we all originate from seven different female lines -known as the seven sisters. Also mathematically we all have a common ancestor going back to the seventh generation. Seven is a mystical number.
My family have humble working class origins but my looks -which are unique in my family, suggest a viking influence - probably due to some pillaging etc. going back many centuries!!
My hairdresser, Andrea (a frequent visitor to Mykonos!) assured me on my last visit that i am part of a rare breed -threatened by extiction due to interbreeding of the races i.e. a real blonde. Apparently he'd read this in a trade magazine!
Just a small aside Garinda -you need to update your profile, i'd add charmer of snakes and teller of tales to your interests

[garinda]

Originally Posted by mobertol

Genetic studies have shown that we all originate from seven different female lines -known as the seven sisters. Also mathematically we all have a common ancestor going back to the seventh generation. Seven is a mystical number.
My family have humble working class origins but my looks -which are unique in my family, suggest a viking influence - probably due to some pillaging etc. going back many centuries!!
My hairdresser, Andrea (a frequent visitor to Mykonos!) assured me on my last visit that i am part of a rare breed -threatened by extiction due to interbreeding of the races i.e. a real blonde. Apparently he'd read this in a trade magazine!
Just a small aside Garinda -you need to update your profile, i'd add charmer of snakes and teller of tales to your interests

That's just through one person.

Many of Marmaduke Beckwith's ancestors go back to Normandy, and before that Scandinavia.

Many other family lines peter out not long before the first census.

Aren't the whole of mankind meant to be descended from one woman in east Africa, scientists have called Eve?

I once did a thread on here because someone, Westender, said they only had Lancashire roots.

If you keep doubling your parents/grandparents/great grandparents etc., once you go back a thousand years you end up with 100,000's of direct ancestors.

Which was greater than the population around here then, so she was wrong.

We're all mongrels.

[mobertol]

Originally Posted by garinda

We're all mongrels.

Unfortunately, I think you're right here -but i still like to think of myself in canine terms as an Afghan hound!

[mobertol]

Originally Posted by garinda

Aren't the whole of mankind meant to be descended from one woman in east Africa, scientists have called Eve?

I've heard this said but in practical terms it would be impossible for the genetic diversity that is present in the human race to have developed from one single individual.....

[garinda]

Originally Posted by mobertol

i still like to think of myself in canine terms as an Afghan hound!

Well I hope they give you a rabies shot, before you next enter Britain.

And no smuggling yourself in on the back of a lorry!



Found this, but not the thread I started about anscestor numbers...yet.

Originally Posted by garinda

In a thread I did, based on my night time musings I worked out that if you go back to 1000 AD, we must all be 'nearly' related through blood ties.

I'm not doubting your claim, but if you average four generations per century, if we only take it back to 1600, that means you have 65,536 direct descendants. As far as I can gather the population of the county, pre-industrial revolution, was under 60,000. Therefore your ancestors may have had to interbreed, to ensure pure Lancastrian stock.

It's a wonder you haven't got one big eye, and eleven fingers and toes...or have you?

http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f...y-29873-2.html

[garinda]

Found it!

Originally Posted by garinda

Ok, I can't sleep, so I thought I'd share my thoughts with anyone who may be remotely interested.

We all have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents, sixteen great great grandparents, thirty two great great great grandparents, and so on, and so on.... the numbers doubling each generation.

If we average that there are four generations per century, in a thousand year period we will all have 1,009,511,627,776 direct ancestors.

I hope my maths isn't wrong. I think it's 2 to the power of 40, and I had to get Google to do it, because my calculator didn't have enough digits. Any way it's a huge number.

Since the population of the UK in 1000 AD was roughly 1,420,000 that means we all must be related in some way, and I suppose we should count ourselves lucky not to have eleven fingers or webbed toes.

Any comments, or corrections to my mathematics, will be appreciated.

http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f...ily-27540.html

[Retlaw]

Originally Posted by garinda
Ok, I can't sleep, so I thought I'd share my thoughts with anyone who may be remotely interested.

We all have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents, sixteen great great grandparents, thirty two great great great grandparents, and so on, and so on.... the numbers doubling each generation.

If we average that there are four generations per century, in a thousand year period we will all have 1,009,511,627,776 direct ancestors.
Who decided it was 4 generations per century, my greatgrandfather was born in 1820.
I hope my maths isn't wrong. I think it's 2 to the power of 40, and I had to get Google to do it, because my calculator didn't have enough digits. Any way it's a huge number.

Since the population of the UK in 1000 AD was roughly 1,420,000 that means we all must be related in some way, and I suppose we should count ourselves lucky not to have eleven fingers or webbed toes.

Any comments, or corrections to my mathematics, will be appreciated.
Then the gene pool got polluted by the frogs, led by William the conk.
The god botherers would have it that we are all descended from Adam & Eve, so if they had children, who was bonking who, every ones genes would be the same, the same could be said of the so called seven, who fathered them, who fathered their children.
There are supposed to be several distinct races on this earth. Just might be we've had a visit from outer space. Beam me up Scotty.

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by garinda

Nnety percent of us all will be in some way related.

What an aweful thought!

[Atarah]

To get back on track, I have today been again to Hartmann Street, and cant believe I missed this one, on the same side as all the other "royal" connected house names, there is also OSBORNE HOUSE!!!!!
Osborne House - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edward V11 was of course one of Queen Victoria's children
Queen Victoria - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Help! Where do I go from here?

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Retlaw

Originally Posted by garinda
Ok, I can't sleep, so I thought I'd share my thoughts with anyone who may be remotely interested.

We all have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grandparents, sixteen great great grandparents, thirty two great great great grandparents, and so on, and so on.... the numbers doubling each generation.

If we average that there are four generations per century, in a thousand year period we will all have 1,009,511,627,776 direct ancestors.
Who decided it was 4 generations per century, my greatgrandfather was born in 1820.
I hope my maths isn't wrong. I think it's 2 to the power of 40, and I had to get Google to do it, because my calculator didn't have enough digits. Any way it's a huge number.

Since the population of the UK in 1000 AD was roughly 1,420,000 that means we all must be related in some way, and I suppose we should count ourselves lucky not to have eleven fingers or webbed toes.

Any comments, or corrections to my mathematics, will be appreciated.
Then the gene pool got polluted by the frogs, led by William the conk.
The god botherers would have it that we are all descended from Adam & Eve, so if they had children, who was bonking who, every ones genes would be the same, the same could be said of the so called seven, who fathered them, who fathered their children.
There are supposed to be several distinct races on this earth. Just might be we've had a visit from outer space. Beam me up Scotty.

Yes but when the Normans came here, who weren't incidentally Gauls, but from Scandinavia, hence Nor(se)man, Britain had already been colonised by the Angles, and the Saxons, who of course came from what we today call Germany.

Since when I can't sleep I make up my own rules, when doing loopy mind tricks.

I think over the last thousand years the average age of 25 to reproduce is probably a bit on the high side, given the life expectancy was much lower in past centuries, and people had children earlier than we do today.

Plus having 4 generations per century made the maths a whole lot easier.

Especially when we're talking in billions, give or take the odd year, if we adjust the figures for your grandfather.

[garinda]

I just guestimated in my nighttime slumbers, but on checking the general concensus seems to be that genealogically a generation is considered to be 25 years/4 per century, and 20 years/5 per century in the distant past, because of earlier breeding/shorter life expectancies.

Here's just one link. If you search 'How long is a generation', the answers are much the same.

How Long Is a Generation?

http://www.ancestry.com/learn/librar...?article=11152

Now, back to dirty Bertie, and the good time Steiner gals...before Atarah issues a royal death warrant.

[mobertol]

The Seven Daughters of Eve
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Seven Daughters of Eve (2001, ISBN 0-393-02018-5) is a book by Bryan Sykes that presents the theory of human mitochondrial genetics to a general audience. Sykes explains the principles of genetics and human evolution, the particularities of mitochondrial DNA, and analyses of ancient DNA to genetically link modern humans to prehistoric ancestors.
NB.Mitochondria are the little powerhouses present in all our cells!)


The title of the book comes from one of the principal achievements of mitochondrial genetics, which is the classification of all modern Europeans into seven groups, the mitochondrial haplogroups. Each haplogroup is defined by set of characteristic mutations on the mitochondrial genome, and can be traced along a person's maternal line to a specific prehistoric woman. Sykes refers to these women as "clan mothers", though these women did not all live concurrently. Indeed some "clan mothers" are descended from others (although not maternally). All these women in turn shared a common maternal ancestor, the Mitochondrial Eve.


The seven "clan mothers" mentioned by Sykes each correspond to one (or more) human mitochondrial haplogroups.

Ursula: corresponds to Haplogroup U (specifically U5, and excluding its subgroup K)
Xenia: corresponds to Haplogroup X
Helena: corresponds to Haplogroup H
Velda: corresponds to Haplogroup V
Tara: corresponds to Haplogroup T
Katrine: corresponds to Haplogroup K
Jasmine: corresponds to Haplogroup J

Sykes wrote in the book that there were seven major mitochondrial lineages for modern Europeans, though he subsequently wrote that with the additional data from Scandinavia and Eastern Europe, Ulrike (see below) could have been promoted to be the eighth clan mother for Europe.[1]

Sykes has invented names for an additional 29 "clan mothers" worldwide, each corresponding to a different haplogroup identified by geneticists: "Fufei, Ina, Aiyana/Ai, Yumi, Nene, Naomi, Una, Uta, Ulrike, Uma, Ulla, Ulaana, Lara, Lamia, Lalamika, Latasha, Malaxshmi, Emiko, Gaia, Chochmingwu/Chie, Djigonasee/Sachi, Makeda, Lingaire, Lubaya, Limber, Lila, Lungile, Latifa and Layla."[4]

Looks like we were both right one way or another Garinda

It has also been shown that the gene for intelligence is carried on the female X-chromosomes!
I can quite see myself being related to Xenia -which clan do you think you belong to?

[MargaretR]

Genetics gets even more complicated when you explore theories on the origins of the RH negative blood factor.


PS - that's where dads get to affect the outcome

[mobertol]

Hope you have time to read Margaret -this is way off thread so i apologise to Atarah.....

Rh-negative women and men have several "Unusual Traits" that Rh-positives don't. Some call them "Reptilian Traits".
* An EXTRA-Vertebra (a "Tail Bone")....some are born with a tail(called a "Cauda").
* Lower than normal Body Temperature
* Lower than normal Blood Pressure
* Higher mental analytical abilities.
* Higher Negative-ion shielding (from positive "charged" virus/bacteria)around the body.
* High Sensitivity to EM and ELF Fields.
* Hyper Vision and other senses.
(My eldest son is A- blood-type but i've never noticed any of these traits - he is above averagely bright though...)
Population data

The frequency of Rh factor blood types and the RhD neg allele gene differs in various populations.
Population data for the Rh D factor and the RhD neg allele[12]
Population Rh(D) Neg Rh(D) Pos Rh(D) Neg alleles
Basque people 21–36%[13] 65% approx 60%
other Europeans 16% 84% 40%
African American approx 7% 93% approx 26%
Native Americans approx 1% 99% approx 10%
African descent less 1% over 99% 3%
Asian less 1% over 99% 1%

The Rh-Negatives Factor is considered a "Mutation" of "Unknown Origin", which happened in Europe, about 25,000-35,000 years ago. Then this group spread heavily into the area of what is now Spain, England, Ireland, etc.
The researches of R. Frank, a scholar at the University of Iowa, suggest that the Basques were far-advanced in navigational skills and other aspects of technology long before the rise of the Roman Empire. The Basques, she believes, are the last remnants of the megalith builders, who left behind dolmens, standing stones, and other rock structures all across Europe and perhaps even in eastern North America.

Two facts set the Basque peoples apart from the other Europeans who have dominated the continent the past 3,000 years: (1) The Basque language is distinctly different; and (2) The Basques have the highest recorded level of Rh-negative blood (roughly twice that of most Europeans), as well as substantially lower levels of Type B blood and a higher incidence of Type O blood.

Some probable technological feats of the Basques or their ancestors are:

Stonehenge and similar megalithic structures....A unique system of measurement based on the number 7, instead of 10, 12, or 60 Regular visits to North America long before Columbus to fish and to trade for beaver skins. Recently unearthed British customs records show large Basque imports of beaver pelts from 1380-1433. The invention of a sophisticated navigational device called an "abacus." (No relation to the common abacus.)
This is from various sources - just type in Rhesus negative genetics into Google -it gets really weird if you follow the Reptilian Traits!

[MargaretR]

I am already aware of the implications of RHneg - I am one.
We are all hybrids to some extent, but it is reassuring to know that -
'you are not your body and are only in it for experience'