Beginner's Guide to Family Tree DNA's Chromosome Painter

🕵️‍ 😟🤔 🌳 ✅ 🌐 🔎 ✍️ 👉🏼
----------------
CONTINUE LEARNING
📺
📺
↪️ Grab your FREE genealogy research guides and templates at www.familyhistoryfanatics.com...
⚡ Want to grow your family tree faster? Join our membership program.
/ @familyhistoryfanatics
📗 Like to read? Check out these books
www.familyhistoryfanatics.com...
----------------
✅ Let's connect:
✔️ Subscribe for more genealogy tips: tinyurl.com/FHFanaticsUA-cam
✔️ Website: www.familyhistoryfanatics.com
✔️ Share Video Ideas: www.familyhistoryfanatics.com...
#FamilyHistoryFanatics #geneticgenealogy #FamilyTreeDNA

[@debbieroot4618]

Catching you on the replay. Have a great day.

[@user-dw9rs2cm1m]

I was in shock to see your DNA CHROMOSOME PAINTER. I actually thought you had my results on your video.

[@Samlaren]

Excellent introduction! How accurate are the split between the chromosome pair? I mean that FT doesn't seem to be able in example Chromosome Browser to see the difference of from whom you inherited. Is this different? Or can I trust for example that the upper chromosome in no 1 says Scandinavia and the lower in no 1 says Finland?
If it is reliable that I should be able to say that the lower in the pair is alwas my mother and the upper my father. But If I can see that difference, why can't FT? Why doesn't it say that my aunt on my fathers side matches on the upper one, only chromosome 1, just as my cousin from my mothers side that should match the lower one.
So, is it reliable, and if so why doesnt FT-DNA use that knowledge everywhere in their tools???

[@secretsquirrel992]

That's exactly what I want to know- is the upper one of the two always the same parent, even if the parents are not identified? Or in some chromosomes might a different parent happen to be the upper one in the diagram, is it consistent in every chromosome or does the upper one vary ..?

[@11sered11]

I have a question please , in my country Kuwait and Arab countries it’s very common to have arranged marriage, so sometimes two brothers marry two sisters , so if those two partner had a child and we tested both children autosomal family finder test their test results will have cm like they are brothers or cousins?

[@secretsquirrel992]

I have so many issues im wtestling with in my dna results, and every new piece if information just raises mire questions. Can anyone please tell me whether, when these painted chromosomes are not assigned to specific parents *is the same parent's contribution always at the top* or might the top one of one pair, say chromosome 1 be the mother but in another pair, say chromosome 10, might the top one be the dad, or, dven uf the oarebts arent identified, is the contribution of the same at the top in each chromosome pair or does it vary ftom chromosome to chromosome?

[@madmartinline6]

I was disappointed with my DNA results . OK they tell me that I am 1% Jewish, 3% Finnish & a few other things which is interesting. But it was the 50% British that bothered me. Like saying someone is 50% American or 50% Australian. Britain has been invaded by the French, Anglo Saxons, Danes, Vikings, Romans, Celts over the centuries. A waste of money in my view.

[@awizenwoman]

Andy, I've abandoned my belief that any of these company's claims are accurate, even the estimated ethnicity, as I've traced numerous paternal and maternal DNA common ancestors back to England but Ancestry says that they are Irish, as that is where they settled in the late 1600, but from England. Plus another example, is that Walker is a Scottish name, but my Mother's was so-called Irish Walkers were immigrants were from Yorkshire, England, and there is a DNA match to my paternal US cousin matches who have Walkers in their tree that originate from Scotland. So go figure! It really pays to trace the origins of the origins of the original DNA common ancestor for an accurate picture. This is what irritates me but yet motivates my research.

[@Samlaren]

Ethnicity is just an estimation, and they should really disclose _when_ that estimate would have been correct in history.
Take Sweden for example. It started to get populated after the ice age, so the estimate must be nearer in time then 14 000 years ago. But many sites have Israel for (israeli) jews, and the were a minority in Israel even a hundred years ago.
So it is neither an exact science and nor obvious what they mean by etnicity since everyone has always been moving.

[@madmartinline6]

Yes, & who are the English anyway ?