[babble-on]

if it’s back 6-10 generations, it’s way less than 1%.

[Jim Noble]

These are PROBABILITY scores, and they have a CONFIDENCE LEVEL.

There's no such thing as "American Indian DNA". There are DNA sequences (millions) that are found most commonly in Berbers, or Han Chinese, etc, etc.

If you probe small enough segments, you can find such in everybody. Amazon has sold a terrific product by telling people "you are 1% Jewish", but, when you read the fine print, you see "at the 50% confidence level". Companies like FTDNA allow you to adjust your desired confidence level, and when you go up to 80% or 90% all those "2% African" segments go away.

Y DNA is a bit different, since men get a Y chromosome only from their fathers, which fathers got it only from theirs, etc. Using Y DNA to probe origins is interesting, but irrelevant to the Warren case since Senator Warren doesn't have any Y DNA.

[rbg81]

if it’s back 6-10 generations, it’s way less than 1%.

---

If its that far back, then it almost certainly was not part of the family “lore”.

Kind of reminds me of the faux lie detector test that Christina Ford had done: so watered down as to be Worthless.

[PUGACHEV]

I figure it to be .2 to 1.6, putting her last full-blodded Americn Indian ancestor as far back as 1690. I am suspicious of the certainty of the five reported segments. I suspect that not all five are 99% as the article claims.