Post by Robin on Apr 11, 2014 15:10:18 GMT
I'm still learning about DNA and genealogy. I took Ancestry.com's autosomal DNA test and while the origin percentage estimates were very interesting, I'm struggling to see any other real benefit. Hundreds of DNA matches came up with other people but only 19 of them actually have any shared ancestors in their tree so far, and all of them are colonial links which are well documented. Of those that have no shared ancestors in their trees, I have yet to make ANY relationship connect with - no one can figure out how we might be related, even when both our trees are extensive. And even when there is a shared ancestor known, what is that telling me that I didn't already know? I could have connected with those people just by doing a family tree search, no DNA is needed. I guess it tells me that those particular lines are probably "legitimate" but confirming that I am actually a blood descendant of the ancestors in my tree were not my reason for doing to the DNA test.
The closest I've come to making a relationship connection with a DNA match is finding someone who has an entirely Norwegian tree whereas I only have one branch which is Norwegian so our relationship must lie somewhere in that side of my family. But there's still no shared ancestor in our trees.
I suppose with the way DNA tests are advertised, I was kind of hoping to break down some of my brick walls with the results. Was that an unreasonable expectation?
The closest I've come to making a relationship connection with a DNA match is finding someone who has an entirely Norwegian tree whereas I only have one branch which is Norwegian so our relationship must lie somewhere in that side of my family. But there's still no shared ancestor in our trees.
I suppose with the way DNA tests are advertised, I was kind of hoping to break down some of my brick walls with the results. Was that an unreasonable expectation?