Quote:
Originally Posted by Margaret in Burton
I need a lie down just reading the posts on here. I really don’t get this dna thing and how you sort it out. I must be incredibly thick
|
No, you are not incredibly think. I refuse to allow that comment!
I know I am not
incredibly think, but on this I feel I am! Why don't I get it? I did statistics as part of my A Level maths course and that was the only part I was any good at. I should get this as it seems similar, but I really don't.
It doesn't help when the only DNA match I've come across where there really looked like the connection between me and the other person was earlier than the line on my tree currently goes back to, involves me having an earlier ancestor who I believe was buried aged 4 or 5, growing up and having children! That didn't fill me with confidence! I can't un-see the burial.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kit
I think using a spreadsheet might be the best bet. Then when you have sorted groups you can colour code them on ancestry.
Using the Leeds method just start at the first match and work your way down.
I put all names from the ancestry match list on a spreadsheet, picked the first match, gave them a colour and coloured all shared matches. Then I looked at the second match. If they did not match the first one, they got a second colour and repeat.
Don't try and work anything out at first, not until you are fed up with assigning colours. The issue is that the further down the tree you get the more spread the DNA is so it might look like people aren't related although they really are.
|
I will go back to the Leeds method thing and go past the first sentence! Thanks Toni. (*wonders if cheese sandwiches will do for meals today?*)