SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: combjelly who wrote (98728)10/15/2018 8:34:18 PM
From: gamesmistress1 Recommendation

Recommended By
i-node

  Read Replies (1) of 354610
 
She claimed her mother was part Cherokee and part Delaware. So she was claiming that she too is part Cherokee and part Delaware. Don't know what the Delawares say (assuming there are any around) but the Cherokees say she is NOT and are obviously fed up with her. Now we are getting oh, this DNA analysis proves she has an "Native American" ancestor 6-10 generations ago so that "proves" she is part NA or has "NA heritage."

Well, 23andMe says I "most likely had a fourth-great-grandparent, fifth-great-grandparent, sixth-great-grandparent, or seventh-great- (or greater) grandparent who was 100% Sardinian. This person was likely born between 1690 and 1780."

Also, I "most likely had a third-great-grandparent, fourth-great-grandparent, fifth-great-grandparent, sixth-great-grandparent, or seventh-great- (or greater) grandparent who was 100% Balkan. This person was likely born between 1690 and 1810."

So I have "Sardinian heritage", right? Or maybe I'm Queen of the Balkans! Makes as much sense as EW's claims.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext