CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You do understand that Jew was a race...before it was a religion.....
This is retarded even for you. How was Jew "a race" before the concepts of race or racial classification were even invented? You're literally making up complete bullshit.
You do understand that you could have simply looked it up, and found an answer simple enough for a toddler to understand?....
Jew has no definite genetic or biological definition. Jew is a religion and a ethnic group that believes they are better than “gentile”!which they call Goyum.
Jews believe they will one day rule the earth and they will reign over these “lowly people.
Even Hitler specifically denounce genetic aspect of Jews. Hitler simply knew this group called Jews would abstractly enslave us with Usury and complex money changing
Jew has no definite genetic or biological definition. Jew is a religion and a ethnic group that believes they are better than “gentile”!which they call Goyum.
Yes, but it's important to stipulate what you mean by ethnic group. They share a religion and language, but being Jewish is not determined by your genetics.
Jews believe they will one day rule the earth and they will reign over these “lowly people.
Many of them deserve the reputation they have, sure.
Right. If I didn't hate Jews I would lie and pretend I had never heard about the reputation of Jews. Shut up you stupid prick. Stop telling other people what they think you fucking Nazi.
No, there is not. Repeatedly making the same false claim isn't going to make it true. There are only five races of humans on the entire planet: caucasoids, negroids, australoids, capoids and mongoloids.
Your claims are the outrageous bullshit of a global religious cult.
I guess we have different definitions of Race. I'm no expert, I simply know that Jewish people bred separately for a long period of time and developed specific identifying physical traits.
In my non-expert mind, being able to tell two groups of people apart simply due to their physical traits would constitute different races of people. But maybe that is just different Ethnic Groups?
I guess I was technically wrong, but this debate seems to be trying to make the point that you cannot be a "jew" without believing in Judaism. Which clearly isn't true or how we use language.
"Jew" refers to both the race and the religion. You can't convert to ethnic Jew, but you can convert to religious Jew.
The Jewish race where the Hebrews. Hebrews invented Judaism so that they could claim they are superior and matter more than everyone else because they are "God's chosen people". Nowadays we have white atheists who claim they are semitic Jews because there ancestors converted to a religion which was created by an extinct group of middle eastern tribes.
Jews an inferior race?? I remember a few years ago a study came out that showed 80+% of our best actors, singers, instrumentalists, comedians, were "Jews". They are certainly NOT an inferior race. I wonder how many are millionaires?, Doctors, scientists, educators, judges. Again, Hitler was wrong, and the KKK, and White Supremacists …. the "good guys on the other side" and HE who supports them, ALL wrong!!
Jews an inferior race?? I remember a few years ago a study came out that showed 80+% of our best actors, singers, instrumentalists, comedians, were "Jews".
Jews represent 2 percent of the population, so if you honestly think having 80 percent of the most successful entertainers is explainable by sheer coincidence then shame on you. Jews are the most powerful cult the world has ever known, which is frankly well illustrated by the fact they can convince you they are a biological race.
If you want to go full red pill on the matter then there is NO EVIDENCE the ancient tribes of Israel ever left Israel in the first place. The only actual source for this myth which is assumed de facto to be true by pretty much everybody in America is Biblical scripture.
I have had thoughts that maybe Hitler was right (at least short of murder). The Jews invented Usury and Capitalism- which raw capitalism is really an abstract form of slavery especially given the way the IMF works. Some Jews just live off the country’s interest they must pay for the privilege to use this money which is really NOTHING but a trick.
Anyway, I am at least “suspicious “ of Jews. But you can’t even examine any part of Hitler history without being thrown in the fascist bin.
You like to eat fermented whale testicle stew while you plot world domination with your zionist jew cabal and rape kittens with screwdrivers and worship satan and tickle your own prostate with a macaroni noodle
Hello hater:
In your PM, I see that you acknowledge I'm Jewish.. If you can't say that publicly, I'll say it for you.. Your hatred for the Jews can no longer be denied either..
In your PM, I see that you acknowledge I'm Jewish.
Omg, you are quite literally delusional, aren't you? It simply doesn't matter what extent of proof is shoved into your idiotic little face, you will continue to ignore it all and then claim everybody else is ignoring the proof. You are a LYING LITTLE RETARD.
DNA ancestry tests branded 'meaningless'
Commercial DNA tests that claim to tell people whether they are related to Richard III or descended from the Vikings are no more than "genetic astrology", scientists have warned.
You can be both ethnically Jewish and part of the Jewish religion.
Ethnicity is not the same thing as race, and the "expert" in your story (printed in a Jewish newspaper) has been thoroughly debunked by the latest scientific research. Your article is from 2012 you moron:-
Genetic markers cannot determine Jewish descent
Obviously, what kept Jews identity were their language, culture, tradition and religion. Thus, whatever their biological hereditary kinships, both the trans-generational vertical, and intra-generation horizontal relationships are secondary consequences. However, the increasing reliance on scientific reductionism in biological thinking of the last two centuries eventually culminated in turning the evidence of DNA sequences into the essence of the characterization of Jewishness rather than its consequence. Still, in spite of repeated efforts, there is no agreed upon criterion to identify Jews, and samples examined for the distribution of biological or molecular markers all depend on the preconceived biases of the investigators.
Jews have a unique genetic signature because the Greeks and Iranians who conquered northern Turkey converted en masse to the religion of Judaism 2,000 years ago. As the peer-reviewed article above stipulates, their unique genetic signature has nothing to do with Judaism. You (i.e. your "expert") is trying to put effect before cause. He seems to believe the unique genetic signature only exists because these people converted to Judaism, which is absolutely effing ridiculous!
I'll admit that the article I put was wrong because the person who wrote it was talking about race. But, it's not just a religion because you can be ethnically Jewish. Do you at least agree with this statement?
I'll admit that the article I put was wrong because the person who wrote it was talking about race.
Very noble of you. I appreciate your candour.
But, it's not just a religion because you can be ethnically Jewish. Do you at least agree with this statement?
It's a circular argument. Any group which shares a common culture or religion is technically an ethnic group and hence there is nothing special about Jews in this regard. By this same logic Catholics are an ethnic group, as are Sunni Muslims.
What you have to remember is that Christian culture has been an enormous influence on everything in Europe, and it still is a huge influence in America. The Bible was taken literally by people, so naturally they believed the stories about the Israelites being led out of Egypt by Moses during the Exodus. But the problem is there is no historical evidence this event ever happened. The racial similarities between Ashkenazi Jews were further taken as evidence of the Biblical account, because it seemed reasonable for Christians (and Jews) to presume it meant they shared a common lineage to the original Israelites. But as you can see from the information I have posted, the latest scientific research debunks this as a myth. Ashkenazis do share a common lineage, but they are not from Israel, they are from Turkey. There is no genetic relationship between the two groups.
If you are being downvoted then I'd imagine it's because people understand what you are saying is utter nonsense. That isn't anybody's fault except your own.
I think you can actually , it’s an interesting question .
I got this piece from Judaism101 ......
In the 1980s, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Jews are a race, at least for purposes of certain anti-discrimination laws. Their reasoning: at the time these laws were passed, people routinely spoke of the "Jewish race" or the "Italian race" as well as the "Negro race," so that is what the legislators intended to protect.
But many Jews were deeply offended by that decision, offended by any hint that Jews could be considered a race. The idea of Jews as a race brings to mind nightmarish visions of Nazi Germany, where Jews were declared to be not just a race, but an inferior race that had to be rounded up into ghettos and exterminated like vermin.
But setting aside the emotional issues, Jews are clearly not a race.
Race is a genetic distinction, and refers to people with shared ancestry and shared genetic traits. You can't change your race; it's in your DNA. I could never become black or Asian no matter how much I might want to.
Common ancestry is not required to be a Jew. Many Jews worldwide share common ancestry, as shown by genetic research; however, you can be a Jew without sharing this common ancestry, for example, by converting. Thus, although I could never become black or Asian, blacks and Asians have become Jews (Sammy Davis Jr. and Connie Chung).
I also thought the same, so when someone posted they were Jewish as declared by a DNA test my first thought was, no way. But I did some research on Ashkenazi Jews and it seems like there is enough evidence and genetic distinction to where they are actually one. It was quite interesting to read.
Hi Mint I’ve also done research here is the piece I posted from the excellent Skeptoid site .....
I came across this excellent piece in Skeptoid it’s lenghty but most Illuminating ....
Regards the DNA testing I was just curious how anyone can definitively say one is Jewish through such a test , what is the difference in the DNA of one claiming to be Jewish ?
Can a DNA test clear up questions you may have about your heritage? If so how? In television advertisements, these companies show a person who talks about his family's German ancestry, how devout he was towards his family traditions including lederhosen dancing (Schuhplattler). But when he learns that his DNA indicates his ancestry is Scottish rather than German, he eagerly replaces his lederhosen with a Scottish tartan kilt.
There are many problems here for me. I am certain that this is a stylized advertisement—not an actual person. But family traditions like lederhosen dancing exist apart from a DNA test. Culture is learned and has nothing to do with your genetics. The whole idea that someone can learn who they really are through genetics is, in my opinion, nonsense. I find the whole idea that DNA markers are a superior method to determine ancestry slightly racist, similar to the idea that "blood" is paramount. Furthermore, I agree with a 2007 article in the journal Science, about ancestry DNA testing, in which the authors write:
"Because race has such profound social, political and economic consequences, we should be wary of allowing the concept to be redefined in a way that obscures its historical roots and disconnects from its cultural and socioeconomic context. The article recommends that the American Society of Human Genetics and other genetic and anthropological associations develop policy statements that make clear the limitations and potential dangers of genetic ancestry testing. Among the potentially problematic byproducts of widespread genetic ancestry testing: questionable claims of membership to Native American tribes for financial or other benefits; patients asking doctors to take ancestry tests into consideration when making medical decisions; and skewed census data due to people changing ethnicity on government forms. Moreover, many Americans are emotionally invested in finding an ancestral homeland, and thus vulnerable to a test that can produce mixed results at best and false leads at worse. 'This search for a homeland is particularly poignant for African Americans, who hope to recapture a history stolen by slavery.'"
All of the major companies advertising this form of ancestry-related DNA testing use autosomal DNA tests. The companies don't exactly promote the accuracy of the test, but tend to give the impression that it is the path to your true heritage. It takes a little searching, but you can find a disclosure that accurately shows the companies' beliefs about the usefulness of their tests. For example, ancestry.com writes:
"Your AncestryDNA� results include information about your ethnicity across 26 regions/ethnicities and identifies potential relatives through DNA matching to others who have taken the AncestryDNA test. Your results are a great starting point for more family history research, ?and it can also be a way to dig even deeper into the research you've already done."
That is a far less rosy answer than the advertising leads you to believe. Admixture DNA testing is a valid test—not a sham—but the results are complicated and very limited. It examines non-sex chromosomes inherited from both parents and identifies chromosomes that contain DNA segments from all ancestors. To a limited extent, this test can track the geographical movements of ancestors by examining single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), some of which influence traits such as skin color and resistance to regional diseases. Using that information there are patterns of human genetic diversity which could be weakly correlated with racial and ethnic categories. Those are, in turn, partially correlated with geography. However the same SNPs may be found among several populations around the world, and thus can produce false leads. The companies use the ancestry markers to show genetic differences between what are assumed to be four biologically distinct populations: Africans, Europeans, East Asians, and Native Americans.
Even the language shows some major flaws for this type of test—i.e. weakly correlated, partially correlated, and assumed-distinct populations. And this isn't the only problem in using these tests for discovering ancestry. The results rely on a database of samples to correlate these findings. You need a comparison to a known DNA marker to know that your genetic markers are associated with a certain region. Genetic matching depends largely on the number of samples in a company's database. The researchers published in Science wrote:
"Even databases with 10,000 to 20,000 samples may fail to capture the full array of human genetic diversity in a particular population or region.
The team also pointed out that research into this type of testing has shown inherent flaws, with the writers noting:
"Dark-skinned East Africans might be omitted from the AIMS reference panel of 'Africans' because they exhibit different gene variants."
This means that a certain sizable African populations (the most genetically diverse region on the planet) may not fit in the African marker group, despite being from Africa, appearing to share the same outward traits as other Africans in the database, and having a shared cultural heritage. Such a risk of failure makes this test dubious.
Others have have rolled out mitochondrial DNA testing, which is more problematic. Because such tests analyze less than 1 percent of a person's genome, they will miss most of a person's relatives. If you take a mitochondrial DNA test, you learn something about your mother's ancestry. It leaves out completely your father's ancestry. Plus, if you go back as little as 10 generations, that test is telling you something about only one ancestor out of more than a thousand from that part of your family tree.
Overall DNA tests fail because they cannot account for recent migrations of peoples from their ancient homelands. Present-day patterns of residence are rarely identical to what existed in the past, and social groups have changed over time, in both name and composition. The relation between genetic and cultural heritage is unbelievably murky given current world wide mixing of populations. And, as noted before, these tests don't actually tell you anything about who you are. If you're adopted by an Italian family, raised from birth as Italian, and will die believing you're Italian, how does a DNA test change that? What right does a DNA test have to steal your legacy and tell your great, great, great grandchildren that they are in fact Swedish? None at all. Ancestry is a legacy, not a bloodline.
Ah, allow me to boil something down. And, as noted before, these tests don't actually tell you anything about who you are.
This is correct, they can't tell you who you are. But they can tell you what makes you what you are.
I remember that commercial and while I found it funny, I wondered if throwing away his lederhosen came with a sense of loss for the family/genetics he thought he was a part of. Without meaning to sound racist, it can often be just as obvious to know who is Jewish as it is to know who is Italian, Mexican and so on, so I do believe there are genetics that come into play. Very interesting read by the way.
I don't agree with the final sentence. Ancestry is a legacy AND a bloodline, but it doesn't have to be an identity.
Without meaning to sound racist, it can often be just as obvious to know who is Jewish as it is to know who is Italian, Mexican and so on, so I do believe there are genetics that come into play.
For God's sake, do any of you people read the science?
There are no genetics involved in being Jewish. The reason many Jews share genetic traits is because of this:-
Most of the world's modern Jewish population, as well as the Yiddish language, come from Turkey and not other parts of the Middle East, according to a new study.
Dr Eran Elhaik of the University of Sheffield used a computer modelling system to convert Ashkenazi Jewish DNA - the Jewish communities historically located in Europe - data into geographical information, which revealed that 90 percent of Ashkenazi Jews descend from the Greeks, Iranians and others who colonised northern Anatolia (now northern Turkey) more than 2,000 years ago before converting to Judaism.
The fact that your ancestors converted to Judaism has absolutely nothing to do with the genetic relationship you have to them. Your genes are not Jewish, they are Iranian and/or Greek. Ffs.
Please re-read the statements previous to that where I mentioned that there is a specific Jewish sect which has genetic markers specific to that sect. If you still don't agree with that then no worries.
That piece Notorious posted is based on solid research and I was telling him I read something similar earlier on , it’s makes for very interesting reading
Please re-read the statements previous to that where I mentioned that there is a specific Jewish sect which has genetic markers specific to that sect. If you still don't agree with that then no worries.
It isn't a question of whether I agree with it or not. Personal anecdotes are useless to me. Assuming your story is true, then you are obviously conflating the fact that the sect follows the Jewish religion, with the fact that it has a unique genetic signature. If the same sect followed the Christian religion, would this change its genetic signature?
Then obviously I am right, aren't I? Being Jewish has literally nothing to do with your genetics. The correlation between Jews and specific DNA markers has been falsely interpreted as a causation and it's really that simple.
Hi Mint I’ve also done research here is the piece I posted from the excellent Skeptoid site .....
I came across this excellent piece in Skeptoid it’s lenghty but most Illuminating ....
Regards the DNA testing I was just curious how anyone can definitively say one is Jewish through such a test , what is the difference in the DNA of one claiming to be Jewish ?
Can a DNA test clear up questions you may have about your heritage? If so how? In television advertisements, these companies show a person who talks about his family's German ancestry, how devout he was towards his family traditions including lederhosen dancing (Schuhplattler). But when he learns that his DNA indicates his ancestry is Scottish rather than German, he eagerly replaces his lederhosen with a Scottish tartan kilt.
There are many problems here for me. I am certain that this is a stylized advertisement—not an actual person. But family traditions like lederhosen dancing exist apart from a DNA test. Culture is learned and has nothing to do with your genetics. The whole idea that someone can learn who they really are through genetics is, in my opinion, nonsense. I find the whole idea that DNA markers are a superior method to determine ancestry slightly racist, similar to the idea that "blood" is paramount. Furthermore, I agree with a 2007 article in the journal Science, about ancestry DNA testing, in which the authors write:
"Because race has such profound social, political and economic consequences, we should be wary of allowing the concept to be redefined in a way that obscures its historical roots and disconnects from its cultural and socioeconomic context. The article recommends that the American Society of Human Genetics and other genetic and anthropological associations develop policy statements that make clear the limitations and potential dangers of genetic ancestry testing. Among the potentially problematic byproducts of widespread genetic ancestry testing: questionable claims of membership to Native American tribes for financial or other benefits; patients asking doctors to take ancestry tests into consideration when making medical decisions; and skewed census data due to people changing ethnicity on government forms. Moreover, many Americans are emotionally invested in finding an ancestral homeland, and thus vulnerable to a test that can produce mixed results at best and false leads at worse. 'This search for a homeland is particularly poignant for African Americans, who hope to recapture a history stolen by slavery.'"
All of the major companies advertising this form of ancestry-related DNA testing use autosomal DNA tests. The companies don't exactly promote the accuracy of the test, but tend to give the impression that it is the path to your true heritage. It takes a little searching, but you can find a disclosure that accurately shows the companies' beliefs about the usefulness of their tests. For example, ancestry.com writes:
"Your AncestryDNA� results include information about your ethnicity across 26 regions/ethnicities and identifies potential relatives through DNA matching to others who have taken the AncestryDNA test. Your results are a great starting point for more family history research, ?and it can also be a way to dig even deeper into the research you've already done."
That is a far less rosy answer than the advertising leads you to believe. Admixture DNA testing is a valid test—not a sham—but the results are complicated and very limited. It examines non-sex chromosomes inherited from both parents and identifies chromosomes that contain DNA segments from all ancestors. To a limited extent, this test can track the geographical movements of ancestors by examining single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), some of which influence traits such as skin color and resistance to regional diseases. Using that information there are patterns of human genetic diversity which could be weakly correlated with racial and ethnic categories. Those are, in turn, partially correlated with geography. However the same SNPs may be found among several populations around the world, and thus can produce false leads. The companies use the ancestry markers to show genetic differences between what are assumed to be four biologically distinct populations: Africans, Europeans, East Asians, and Native Americans.
Even the language shows some major flaws for this type of test—i.e. weakly correlated, partially correlated, and assumed-distinct populations. And this isn't the only problem in using these tests for discovering ancestry. The results rely on a database of samples to correlate these findings. You need a comparison to a known DNA marker to know that your genetic markers are associated with a certain region. Genetic matching depends largely on the number of samples in a company's database. The researchers published in Science wrote:
"Even databases with 10,000 to 20,000 samples may fail to capture the full array of human genetic diversity in a particular population or region.
The team also pointed out that research into this type of testing has shown inherent flaws, with the writers noting:
"Dark-skinned East Africans might be omitted from the AIMS reference panel of 'Africans' because they exhibit different gene variants."
This means that a certain sizable African populations (the most genetically diverse region on the planet) may not fit in the African marker group, despite being from Africa, appearing to share the same outward traits as other Africans in the database, and having a shared cultural heritage. Such a risk of failure makes this test dubious.
Others have have rolled out mitochondrial DNA testing, which is more problematic. Because such tests analyze less than 1 percent of a person's genome, they will miss most of a person's relatives. If you take a mitochondrial DNA test, you learn something about your mother's ancestry. It leaves out completely your father's ancestry. Plus, if you go back as little as 10 generations, that test is telling you something about only one ancestor out of more than a thousand from that part of your family tree.
Overall DNA tests fail because they cannot account for recent migrations of peoples from their ancient homelands. Present-day patterns of residence are rarely identical to what existed in the past, and social groups have changed over time, in both name and composition. The relation between genetic and cultural heritage is unbelievably murky given current world wide mixing of populations. And, as noted before, these tests don't actually tell you anything about who you are. If you're adopted by an Italian family, raised from birth as Italian, and will die believing you're Italian, how does a DNA test change that? What right does a DNA test have to steal your legacy and tell your great, great, great grandchildren that they are in fact Swedish? None at all. Ancestry is a legacy, not a bloodline.
In the 1980s, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Jews are a race, at least for purposes of certain anti-discrimination laws
The United States Supreme Court also ruled that corporations have the same rights as people. If Jews were actually a race, then the scientific evidence would speak for itself. The courts would not need to be involved, period. The prosecution of legal action implies heavily that the scientific evidence does not speak for itself and that groups of Jewish lawyers have instead pressured the legal system to give themselves a false status.
All that you say could be true - if it weren't for DNA.. But, DNA trips you up, so you make up some cockamamie story about the OWNER of the lab being Jewish, so OF COUSE, he cheats..
He had it done by a public Israeli ancestry website. In other words, by a business based in the only country in the entire world which believes Jews are a race.
I would be interested to hear who actually did the test as he said he would supply the information, has a blind test ever been conducted to see if Jewish DNA can actually be ascertained?
has a blind test ever been conducted to see if Jewish DNA can actually be ascertained?
I'm not sure what you mean by a "blind test" but Jewish DNA cannot be ascertained because Judaism is a religion practised by a wide variety of races and cultures. There is no such thing as Jewish DNA and that is a demonstrable fact. The idea that there ever was is based on false assumptions which have been made throughout history about the genetic origins of the Jews in Europe. It was believed they descended from the original tribes of Israel and had arrived in Europe sometime after the exodus which the Christian Bible claims Moses led. However, the latest scientific research shows that these peoples (i.e. the Ashkenazi Jews) did not descend from the ancient tribes of Israel, but from the Greeks and Iranians who colonised northern Turkey. They were pagans who converted to the religion of Judaism about 2,000 years ago. There is no biological relationship between them and the Semites who inhabited ancient Israel. They are completely different races.
I mean have people claiming to have Jewish DNA been tested against others who make no such claim to see if there is a discernible difference regards the DNA ?
That’s an interesting piece you posted regarding the Historicity of such claims
I mean have people claiming to have Jewish DNA been tested against others who make no such claim
In order for anybody to claim they have Jewish DNA they must presumably have had a DNA test in the first place. The problem is much deeper rooted, and the incursion of religion into science is ultimately to blame. The account of the Jewish exodus from Israel written in the Bible has been de facto accepted as an accurate historical account of the facts, and from that first piece of false reasoning has come the second, which is that the Jews in Europe must be their descendants. These are both long-standing myths etched into western culture and society, and the science itself has only recently reached a level sufficiently advanced enough to debunk them.
I came across this excellent piece in Skeptoid it’s lenghty but most Illuminating ....
Regards the DNA testing I was just curious how anyone can definitively say one is Jewish through such a test , what is the difference in the DNA of one claiming to be Jewish ?
Can a DNA test clear up questions you may have about your heritage? If so how? In television advertisements, these companies show a person who talks about his family's German ancestry, how devout he was towards his family traditions including lederhosen dancing (Schuhplattler). But when he learns that his DNA indicates his ancestry is Scottish rather than German, he eagerly replaces his lederhosen with a Scottish tartan kilt.
There are many problems here for me. I am certain that this is a stylized advertisement—not an actual person. But family traditions like lederhosen dancing exist apart from a DNA test. Culture is learned and has nothing to do with your genetics. The whole idea that someone can learn who they really are through genetics is, in my opinion, nonsense. I find the whole idea that DNA markers are a superior method to determine ancestry slightly racist, similar to the idea that "blood" is paramount. Furthermore, I agree with a 2007 article in the journal Science, about ancestry DNA testing, in which the authors write:
"Because race has such profound social, political and economic consequences, we should be wary of allowing the concept to be redefined in a way that obscures its historical roots and disconnects from its cultural and socioeconomic context. The article recommends that the American Society of Human Genetics and other genetic and anthropological associations develop policy statements that make clear the limitations and potential dangers of genetic ancestry testing. Among the potentially problematic byproducts of widespread genetic ancestry testing: questionable claims of membership to Native American tribes for financial or other benefits; patients asking doctors to take ancestry tests into consideration when making medical decisions; and skewed census data due to people changing ethnicity on government forms. Moreover, many Americans are emotionally invested in finding an ancestral homeland, and thus vulnerable to a test that can produce mixed results at best and false leads at worse. 'This search for a homeland is particularly poignant for African Americans, who hope to recapture a history stolen by slavery.'"
All of the major companies advertising this form of ancestry-related DNA testing use autosomal DNA tests. The companies don't exactly promote the accuracy of the test, but tend to give the impression that it is the path to your true heritage. It takes a little searching, but you can find a disclosure that accurately shows the companies' beliefs about the usefulness of their tests. For example, ancestry.com writes:
"Your AncestryDNA� results include information about your ethnicity across 26 regions/ethnicities and identifies potential relatives through DNA matching to others who have taken the AncestryDNA test. Your results are a great starting point for more family history research, ?and it can also be a way to dig even deeper into the research you've already done."
That is a far less rosy answer than the advertising leads you to believe. Admixture DNA testing is a valid test—not a sham—but the results are complicated and very limited. It examines non-sex chromosomes inherited from both parents and identifies chromosomes that contain DNA segments from all ancestors. To a limited extent, this test can track the geographical movements of ancestors by examining single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), some of which influence traits such as skin color and resistance to regional diseases. Using that information there are patterns of human genetic diversity which could be weakly correlated with racial and ethnic categories. Those are, in turn, partially correlated with geography. However the same SNPs may be found among several populations around the world, and thus can produce false leads. The companies use the ancestry markers to show genetic differences between what are assumed to be four biologically distinct populations: Africans, Europeans, East Asians, and Native Americans.
Even the language shows some major flaws for this type of test—i.e. weakly correlated, partially correlated, and assumed-distinct populations. And this isn't the only problem in using these tests for discovering ancestry. The results rely on a database of samples to correlate these findings. You need a comparison to a known DNA marker to know that your genetic markers are associated with a certain region. Genetic matching depends largely on the number of samples in a company's database. The researchers published in Science wrote:
"Even databases with 10,000 to 20,000 samples may fail to capture the full array of human genetic diversity in a particular population or region.
The team also pointed out that research into this type of testing has shown inherent flaws, with the writers noting:
"Dark-skinned East Africans might be omitted from the AIMS reference panel of 'Africans' because they exhibit different gene variants."
This means that a certain sizable African populations (the most genetically diverse region on the planet) may not fit in the African marker group, despite being from Africa, appearing to share the same outward traits as other Africans in the database, and having a shared cultural heritage. Such a risk of failure makes this test dubious.
Others have have rolled out mitochondrial DNA testing, which is more problematic. Because such tests analyze less than 1 percent of a person's genome, they will miss most of a person's relatives. If you take a mitochondrial DNA test, you learn something about your mother's ancestry. It leaves out completely your father's ancestry. Plus, if you go back as little as 10 generations, that test is telling you something about only one ancestor out of more than a thousand from that part of your family tree.
Overall DNA tests fail because they cannot account for recent migrations of peoples from their ancient homelands. Present-day patterns of residence are rarely identical to what existed in the past, and social groups have changed over time, in both name and composition. The relation between genetic and cultural heritage is unbelievably murky given current world wide mixing of populations. And, as noted before, these tests don't actually tell you anything about who you are. If you're adopted by an Italian family, raised from birth as Italian, and will die believing you're Italian, how does a DNA test change that? What right does a DNA test have to steal your legacy and tell your great, great, great grandchildren that they are in fact Swedish? None at all. Ancestry is a legacy, not a bloodline.
That's a good article. Well done for finding it. Of course what it confirms is quite obvious: people selling a product often bend the truth and/or make misleading claims about it.
Regards the DNA testing I was just curious how anyone can definitively say one is Jewish through such a test , what is the difference in the DNA of one claiming to be Jewish ?
The tests look for genetic markers, which is legitimate, but the problem is those results then need to be translated into language, which is where religious myths have permeated the science. Instead of being told they are genetically related to Greeks and Iranians people are being told they are genetically Jewish, which is just plain wrong.
Yes , it seems to be a big money making racket . I looked at the board that runs the site Con got his test from 4 out of 6 of them have Jewish names which I think is very telling indeed
Yes , it seems to be a big money making racket . I looked at the board that runs the site Con got his test from 4 out of 6 of them have Jewish names which I think is very telling indeed
Hello again, D:
Well, then.. It's run by Jews.. We ALL know they cheat..
I'm not sure HOW they make more money by cheating, or what the benefit is, though.. You think there's a conspiracy of non Jews around the word with fake DNA tests on sites like this trying to convince Jew haters that they're Jewish???
Well, then.. It's run by Jews.. We ALL know they cheat..
No I never said that , but do you not think it’s a pretty lucrative business ?
I'm not sure HOW they make more money by cheating, or what the benefit is, though..
49 dollars a pop and look at the numbers who get tested is the benefit not obvious ?
You think there's a conspiracy of non Jews around the word with fake DNA tests on sites like this trying to convince Jew haters that they're Jewish???
I don't think so...
I never said that either , also why do you call people who disagree with your assertions that they are Jew haters ?
I predicted this very reaction didn’t I ? I note you totally ignore every point that disagrees with your narrative as in do you not read the disclaimers these very sites post up ?
Here you go ........
"Your AncestryDNA� results include information about your ethnicity across 26 regions/ethnicities and identifies potential relatives through DNA matching to others who have taken the AncestryDNA test. Your results are a great starting point for more family history research, ?and it can also be a way to dig even deeper into the research you've already done."
I made no claims. I sent in the swab. I got the results. Why don’t you test them against yourself? Spend 50 bucks and see if you’re Jewish too.
The very fact that the Israeli company you used believes its religion is physically attached to your DNA molecules proves that everything they say can be disregarded as false and stupid.
I made no claims. I sent in the swab. I got the results. Why don’t you test them against yourself? Spend 50 bucks and see if you’re Jewish too.
You made no claims ? You wanted verification of what you believed to be the truth , I think you fell for slick advertising and a soundly presented pile of nonsense maquerding as “ real cutting edge science “
I’ve no desire to prove whether I’m Jewish as it cannot be proven, I suppose your next defence will be to go along the tired predictable line of “ You’re a holocaust denier and a Nazi “ ?
If you have a valid defence please post it up , by the way did you ever read your sites disclaimers and terms and conditions?
This is standard in their terms and conditions.......
"Your AncestryDNA� results include information about your ethnicity across 26 regions/ethnicities and identifies potential relatives through DNA matching to others who have taken the AncestryDNA test. Your results are a great starting point for more family history research, ?and it can also be a way to dig even deeper into the research you've already done."
You’re welcome 👌☺️ PS ..... Maybe you should ask for your 49 bucks back ?
I paid my 49 bucks. They sent me a kit. I swabbed my mouth and sent the thing in. A few weeks later they sent me a link to the video I showed you. Does it get any blinder than that?
excon
PS> By the way, the company has done 80 million tests around the world. You can Google them, of course.
He had it done by a public Israeli ancestry website. In other words, by a business based in the only country in the entire world which believes Jews are a race.
Hello hater:
In other words, they're LYING when they say they're a scientific DNA tester, when they're actually a Zionist cult..
Only a person who HATES Jews could think up something like that..
Give it a rest, retard. If you don't have a pertinent response to the argument I actually made then just say so. Don't keep trying to change what I said before attacking it you dishonest little halfwit.
they're LYING when they say they're a scientific DNA tester
You used this exact same straw man argument half an hour ago. Nobody has accused them of lying except you. Why don't you read the responses you are given instead of repeating the same debunked allegations over and over and over like a demented record player? Either you can't read or you are PURPOSEFULLY misrepresenting what other people say, which in turn evidences that you know full well you are not Jewish.
You keep continuously (and knowingly) conflating biological DNA with individual human interpretation of DNA testing. If there is one thing we can be sure of it is that you have no intention of remaining honest, since you are throwing out fallacies at the same speed that a machine gun fires bullets.
But many Jews were deeply offended by that decision, offended by any hint that Jews could be considered a race.
But setting aside the emotional issues, Jews are clearly not a race.
Race is a genetic distinction, and refers to people with shared ancestry and shared genetic traits. You can't change your race; it's in your DNA.
Hello D:
Couple things.
I was ONE of those Jews who rejected the notion that we were a race, and for the reasons you outlined.
But, that was BEFORE DNA. You're right.. You can't change your DNA.. My DNA say's that I'm 97% Ashkenazi Jewish. It's clearly NOT a measure of my religiosity. It clearly IS a measure of my ethnicity/race.. Why would I NOT believe it?
You've seen my DNA test, right? I've posted it here many times. I'll be happy to post it again.
I was ONE of those Jews who rejected the notion that we were a race
So let me get this straight you impossibly dishonest little liar. You, an atheist, whose only claim to being Jewish is a religiously biased DNA test conducted by Israeli Jews, were previously a Jew even though you rejected the only thing which you claim makes you Jewish???? You are literally just making this up aren't you? I have honestly never met anybody so dishonest and so stupid in my entire life. You simply refuse point blank to acknowledge the science which proves you are not Jewish. I keep repeatedly posting it and you keep repeatedly ignoring it.
But, that was BEFORE DNA.
What, you were born before DNA? That's impressive. Even more impressive is how you can continue to knowingly repeat the lie that your DNA test proves you are Jewish, when the facts clearly stipulate that it does no such thing:-
Hence, either the peer-reviewed industry journal Frontiers in Genetics is lying, or YOU are lying. I don't think there are going to be too many arguments about which it is. Or perhaps the geneticists involved in this journal are "SCIENCE DENIERS" and "ANTI SEMITES" too, correct?
You've seen my DNA test, right
You have been told HUNDREDS of times that your DNA test was for genetic markers which the website, because of its own ideological bias and out-of-date research, concluded makes you Jewish. DNA doesn't test for words you deceitful little prick, so before your DNA test became your DNA results, a human looked at the data and concluded he/she was going to use the word "Jew". That use of the word "Jew" is DEMONSTRABLY ERRONEOUS, because the genetic markers which were found belong to Greeks and Iranians with no biological connection to the ancient tribes of Israel.
You literally, LITERALLY are pissing all over science and claiming anybody who disagrees with you is a science denier. Put simply, you're a fucking piece of shit liar and a retard. If this were the first, or even the seventh time the science had been explained to you then fair enough. But you come here EVERY SINGLE DAY and LIE YOUR FACE OFF when confronted by the facts. You're like a retarded little child who sticks his fingers in his ears and just screams DNA over and over and over again, while his intellectual superiors patiently try to explain his mistakes.
So let me get this straight you impossibly dishonest little liar. You, an atheist, whose only claim to being Jewish is a religiously biased DNA test conducted by Israeli Jews,
Hello, Jew hater and science denier:
So, my DNA test is NOT accurate because the testing company is owned by Jews who's religious bias overrules the science, so they LIE and CHEAT to their customers around the world. WHY they do this has NEVER been explained by you... What religious benefit is derived by cheating? Do you think this company lied on ALL the 80 million DNA tests it did? Why would they lie about MY test, having never met me?
To suggest that a DNA company, with 80 million subscribers, would LIE and CHEAT the world simply because its founder is Jewish, is SOOOOO unbelievably anti-Semitic and STUPID that I cannot believe ANYONE would hold those views.. Yet, here we are..
If you are too much of a coward to admit being wrong then that's your problem. But don't accuse me of the precise crime you are demonstrably guilty of. Your persistent ad hominem attacks and smear campaign just expose you as a dishonest little shit, unconcerned with the facts of what you are actually arguing about.
So, my DNA test is NOT accurate because the testing company is owned by Jews
Your DNA test is not accurate because the people who conducted it have a religious bias toward the genetic data. This was explained to you yesterday with the help of a peer-reviewed genetics article and today you respond by yet again lying that I am the one denying the science:-
Obviously, what kept Jews identity were their language, culture, tradition and religion. Thus, whatever their biological hereditary kinships, both the trans-generational vertical, and intra-generation horizontal relationships are secondary consequences. However, the increasing reliance on scientific reductionism in biological thinking of the last two centuries eventually culminated in turning the evidence of DNA sequences into the essence of the characterization of Jewishness rather than its consequence. Samples examined for the distribution of biological or molecular markers all depend on the preconceived biases of the investigators.
What religious benefit is gained by a religious cult convincing ordinary people that they belong to that religious cult? Is this a serious question? You're retarded, excon. You're dishonest, manipulative, obnoxious and retarded.
To suggest that a DNA company
A DNA company? Lmfao. So it sells DNA? Stop distorting language you offensively stupid little moron. You used a bog standard ancestry website which offers a sideline in DNA testing.
You have no counter-argument to the science and so you are simply loading your language like the little crook you are.
would LIE and CHEAT
This is another deliberate misrepresentation of what I said. Only you have suggested that they are lying or cheating. Ideological bias is not the same thing as lying and cheating.
It's clear that you have absolutely nothing to say which isn't some form of fallacy.
That is not evidence, retard. That is a link to a religious website which calls itself the Christian Research Institute. The opinion of Christians about whether their own religion is real is "evidence" only to the most stupid and childish of minds.
I suspect that you replied to the wrong post, too. If this was a response to my claim that there is no evidence Abraham lived then even the Jewish press admits this:-
Archaeology has not been able to find the Patriarch Abraham, or signs of his heirs. There is no evidence that the Children of Israel ever went to Egypt, or fled it in the Exodus.
And many of those fossils contain soft tissues. they've even extracted DNA from them. DNA cannot last for 66 million years. So they cannot be 66 million years old.
they've even extracted DNA from them. DNA cannot last for 66 million years.
Nobody claimed they had extracted DNA from 66 million year old dinosaurs except you, retard. Stop trying to debunk your own arguments, and stop using fallacies of language to attempt to circumvent scientific facts.
The oldest DNA samples ever recovered are from insects and plants in ice cores in Greenland up to 800,000 years old.
It's more common than you think. They have extracted samples from dozens of fossils. Also, they have extracted amino acid sequences and compared them to other species. What is dna made from? Amino acids. And even if there was only one sample, that sample could not last for millions of years. It's a scientific impossibility.
It's more common than you think. They have extracted samples from dozens of fossils.
But none of those fossils have been 66 million years old, and hence saying that DNA cannot last 66 million years is not an argument for why fossils don't exist.
Please just shut up. Your intellectual retardation is enormous.
Fool! They have found soft tissue in half of the samples they tested, going all the way back to the Jurasic period. Do some research before you open your mouth. It might save you some embarrassment . And i never claimed fossils don't exist. I simply stated that the evidence suggests that they are not nearly as old as scientists think they are. The reason this offends you is because your theory of evolution requires millions of years. Soft tissue cannot last for millions of years. So fossils cannot be millions of years old.
There is actually a really interesting magazine called Biblical Archaeology that's a fascinating read. They lean more scientific with archaeological findings in religion so it's rather neat to see how the bible and archaeology meet up.
There is NO EVIDENCE that Abraham even existed you retarded imbecilic twit.
And not all, or even most of them, obey God.
That is because certain Jews have used their influence within the communities of which they are a part to proliferate the myth that Jewishness is a genetic trait instead of a religion. It is no wonder then that today we see people who think they can be both Jewish and atheist at the same time.
Your ignorance on this matter is startling. STARTLING.