Column # 1 (row # 2)
The Goal of This Project's Administrators
We want to help each member of this project to discover as CHEAPLY as possible the branches via which he descends from Walter FitzAllan (1106 – June 1177, the first hereditary High Steward of Scotland), so that he and all other members of this project can be positioned on phylogenetic trees like Alex Williamson's at http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=86, and know exactly how they are genetically related to the rest of mankind.
Our goal can not be achieved unless at least one MALE member of each branch of our patrilineal family has a Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) test, e.g., Big Y, in order to discover his Most Recent TERMINAL SNPs (MRTS). Administrator Desideriu's S781 phylogenetic trees below and at http://www.s781.org/allsnps.html show the MRTS of some Big Y tested descendants of the Bonkyll branch of our royal Stewart family.
We recommend that our members discover their MRTS via Big Y or other NGS tests FIRST. If one orders a $359.00 Y-DNA111 STR (Short Tandem Repeat) test instead of a Big Y test first, one may end up paying TWICE for about a hundred mostly ambiguous y-STR marker values ! One may prefer to use the hundreds of dollars saved to pay for autosomal DNA tests for three more members of one's family.
Y-SNPs (single-nucleotide polymorphisms) are 100% PROOF of ancestry. Guessing which y-STR marker values indicate to which branch distantly related cousins belong is almost impossible unless one knows one's Terminal SNP(s), and sometimes even if one does. Why do almost all of FTDNA's unpaid project administrators encourage their customers to order expensive y-STR and SNP pack tests via which the aforesaid genealogical goal can not be achieved, BEFORE they order Big Y tests? CAVEAT EMPTOR?
Unfortunately, FTDNA does not allow one to order Big Y and other SNP tests unless one first purchases at least a $59.00 Y-DNA12 STR test (from which a Big Y tester may never benefit), e.g., by scrolling down at this link or by telephoning FTDNA at 713-868-1438 Monday - Thursday 9 am to 4:30 pm CST and Friday 9 am to noon. A Big Y test can not be ordered until one's STR test has been batched (possibly a couple days or a week after it was ordered, hopefully in time to benefit from a sale).
FTDNA did not report the ~500 Y-STR marker values that are displayed in Table #1 below even though they were discovered via my Big Y test. I had to pay $49 (less than $.10 per marker value instead of for over $3.00 each) to a company that FTDNA's projects turn to for Big Y analysis, but which they are not allowed to promote.
Your computer will automatically search for a more elaborately colorized y-STR comparison table that shows the ~500 y-STR marker values of sixteen or more NGS tested descendants of
Sir John Stewart of Bonkyll if you avoid scrolling, etc. for about ten seconds after you click on this link: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~stewartroyal/index.html#ta2 (those whose NGS test results have not been analyzed yet can not be included in tables like these).
Why Identify Members of Your Own Branch?
Those who belong to the same branch of our patrilineal family can help each other to break through their genealogical "brick walls" from several directions instead of from only one! The MORE members of a branch discover their Terminal SNP(s) and ~500 y-STR marker values, the more likely they will be able to identify their Last Common Patrilineal Ancestor (LCPA), e.g., one of the descendants of Sir John Stewart of Bonkyll. These are some of the reasons that FTDNA's following projects have offered to use their General Funds to help their members to pay for their Big Y tests if they tested positive for:
If the entire NGS test results of a ducal descendant of King Charles II or any other aristocratic member of this Stewart family who has a trustworthy pedigree are made public, this royal Stewart project will gladly compensate whoever pays for their tests, so that more members of this family can prove exactly when their LCPAs lived.
Click here to see the list of those who contributed to our General Fund (near the bottom of this web page).
If you want to order a Big Y test that will benefit every member of your family, you may be able to find a discount coupon via the Internet, e.g., Big Y coupons worth up to $125 off were displayed via the spreadsheet at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY1c/edit#gid=1338933495 during a sale that began before Thanksgiving and ended on December 31, 2016.
Column # 2 (row # 2)
Y-DNA111, etc. STR Test Results
Y-SNPs indicate ancestry far more reliably than y-STR "Genetic Distance" (GD). E.g., the y-STR111 GD between brothers 5987 and 16895 is two. The y-STR67 GD between fourth cousins 143035 and 199984 is also two. The y-STR67 GD between about ten Stewarts whose common ancestor lived about 800 years ago is ZERO.
The results of inexpensive individual SNP tests can prove with 100% certainty:
1) Whether or not a man is a patrilineal descendant of the first hereditary High Steward of Scotland.
2) To which known branches of our patrilineal family he belongs.
Y-DNA111 STR tests that cost about ten times as much can do neither.
According to Steve St. Clair, Big Y is the "last test that you have to take with FTDNA". Big Y is the only DNA test sold by FTDNA via which a man can discover the unique mutation(s) that ONLY members of his own branch (e.g., all the descendants of his fifth great-grandfather) have.
Why does FTDNA report one's Terminal SNPs but NOT the ~500 STR marker values that can be obtained via a Big Y results analysis? Are 500 too much of a good thing, or less useful than 111? Colorized Table #1 below shows that:
* ALL of the marker values that are included in our Y-DNA111 tests except DYS 447 may be included in the results of our Big Y and other NGS tests (click here and wait 20 seconds for more proof).
* About 500 y-STR marker values are over four times as useful as only 111.
Tables like those below help us to interpret y-STR marker values, i.e. to GUESS who belongs to which branch if too few SNPs were discovered via one's Big Y test (more useful SNPs can be discovered via more expensive NGS tests).
SNPs Are The BEST Proof Of Ancestry
Ducal descendant of King Charles II #39568 and everyone listed in the S781 phylogenetic tree below tested positive for SNP S781, and therefore have 100% proof that they are more closely related to King James I of England than James' ninth great grandfather, Sir John Stewart of Bonkyll (c1245 - 1298).
E.g., according to the results of their Y-67 STR tests, there is a 95% probabilty that the LCPA of 143035 and 39568 (a ducal descendant of King Charles II) lived about 510 years ago (1507 AD), and that their LCPA may have therefore been been John Stewart, 3rd Earl of Lennox (c. 1490 - 1526), the great-grandfather of James I of England. See Table # 5 below. 100% proof would require a comparison of their most recent Terminal SNPs (SNPs indicate ancestry far more reliably than one's y-STR marker values can).
The GD between duke #39568 and Robert "Robin" STEWART (1785 - 1865) is only 3, if his y-STR haplotype included only the three off-modal BRANCH STR marker values that his two gggGrandsons (4th cousins 199984 and 143035) have in common. If so, according to FTDNA's estimates and Table # 8 below, there is a 95% probablilty that the LCPA of Duke #39568 and Robert lived about 450 years ago (1567 AD), and may have therefore been a legitimate or illegitimate son, nephew or patrilineal cousin of the aforesaid Earl or his siblings, e.g.,
Henry Stuart (or Stewart), Duke of Albany (7 December 1545 – 10 February 1567).
Why Buy DNA Tests?
Some of us would rather understand from whom we inherited the precious genes that have influenced every aspect of our lives and civilization, and the behavior of our race for hundreds of thousands of years, than for our heirs to gamble our money on lottery tickets, or to spend it on senseless entertainments and addictive drugs like alcohol and tobacco.
To What Family Did Our Ancestors Belong 1000 Years Ago?
Alex Williamson was able to create the phylogenetic tree at http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=7 because everyone listed in it had an NGS test. It displays:
- The TERMINAL SNPs and geographical origins of some of the descendants of the patrilineal family to which our Stewart ancestors belonged a thousand or more years ago (few had surnames at that time).
- More branches of the royal Stewart family than the S-781 phylogenetic tree below shows.
Column # 3 (row # 2)
Where Has Our Family Lived During The Last 338,000 years?
The results of our DNA tests show exactly how we are related to each other and to all of the descendants of the last universal common agnatic ancestor (LUCA or concestor) of all of the extant biological "cryptic species" of mankind. He lived in Africa about 338 thousand years ago (KYA), plus or minus a few 100,000 years, so all of us are as "African" as any ape.
Mankind became less hairy during the extemely HOT Eemian that followed the chilly penultimate glacial period about 130 KYA. Until then, our ancestor's skin must have been as white as that of nearly 100% of all other hairy animals. The skin of SOME RACES DARKENED for camouflage because they continued to evolve where there is almost NO ULTRA-VIOLET RADIATION, e.g., under the multiple canopies of forest vegetation in Africa's huge equatorial rain forest, where noon is no brighter than twilight in Africa's unforested Sahel.
Must hair and feathers prevent the skins of most animals from receiving enough UV to produce the calcium that their bones and eggs need (polar bears are one of the few hairy animals that have BLACK skin)? Would Pygmies be as white as plucked chickens, and their women lactate, if the vitamin D and UV theory of skin color were true? If not, have people or our ancestry been cleverly lied to about the benefits of dark skin, miscegenation, etc. in the name of science by people (and their unwitting accomplices) who have political, etc. agendas?
Some brave hunter gatherers migrated from the safety of the forest into the predator infested and hotter savanna in order to obtain more protein. They retained their heat-reflective fair skin because it was better camouflage there. They evolved in the Sahel's hotter climate for over a hundred thousand years, and as a result became more dolichocephalic and slender, i.e., Nordic looking. Some blue-eyed, Nordic-looking Hamitic races have never left Africa, and have continuously evolved there for as long as any other race or ape has.
Droughts during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) forced a small number of Hamitic hunter gatherers to migrate from the Sahel to the Fertile Crescent, which was uninhabited at that time because there was so little game there. They could not migrate elsewhere, since Africa's huge rain forest was overpopulated by hunter gatherers, and territorial races that had left Africa many thousands of years earlier inhabited the verdant parts of Eurasia where hunter gatherers could survive. The Hamitic a.k.a. Kebaran and Natufian population of the Fertile Crescent, therefore began to harvest grass seed in order to avoid starvation, and eventually learned how to cultivate it.
After Hamites became the world's first farmers, they had to civilize themselves by weeding the survival instincts of criminals out of their genepool. They became more secure and prosperous than the descendants of nomadic hunter gatherers and herdsmen as a result. In the process their race lost many of the survival instincts that it needs in order to compete with races that have never been domesticated.
The descendants of White farmers are so genetically similar to each other because their permanent food supply, homes and geographical isolation from other races caused their small population to increase more rapidly than any other.
Pharaoh Tutankhamun, the Indo-Hittite speaking Canaanites, and the other farmers of the Fertile Crescent once belonged to White haplogroups, e.g., R1b1a1 (ex-R1b1a2). Kurds, Palestinians, Yazidis, and the peasants of rural Egypt are what remains of their posterity in the Fertile Crescent. Most of it has been terrorized, conquered, displaced, enslaved and exterminated by nomadic Semitic herdsmen, who migrated from Ethiopia via the Arabian peninsula about 40 KYA.
Neanderthal hunter-gatherers were the first Europeans. They had far larger brains and were probably more intelligent than any other race, but were unable to compete with the agile Crô-Magnon carnivores who migrated to Europe from the drought stricken Sahel during a warmer part of the last glacial period (about 40 KYA). A few Crô-Magnons mated with Neanderthals and considered them to be "human". Most were less scrupulous, and so ravenous that the last Neanderthal died about 30 KYA.
The Crô-Magnon race evolved for many thousands of years in the cold forests of Europe, and migrated towards the warmer Mediteranean during the LGM. Europeans who inherit the most Crô-Magnon DNA are therefore darker, hairier, less slender, etc. than the Nordic descendants of the refugees from the Fertile Crescent who created the first civilizations after Europe warmed up enough for farming, and who conquered Europe during the Holocene.
Have "Ph.D.s" like red-faced Spencer Wells claimed that our concestor lived only fifty thousand years ago in order to promote their personal, religious or political agendas, or because our MEDIAcracy promotes only "scientists" who claim that our concestor lived hundreds of thousands of years more recently than he truly did, i.e., that all races are "kissing cousins" instead of separate species? Do they want some races to stop benefiting from adaptive speciation, and to substitute geographical, etc. euphemisms like "African" for their scientific names, so that they can become a more united, blended and easily exploited herd?
Column # 4 (row # 2)
To What Species Do We Actually Belong?
So many different domesticated and undomesticated species are known to produce fertile offspring in nature (interspecific hybrids) that biologists practically define a race or "species" as a population of organisms that are GENETICALLY more similar to each other than they are to members of other genepools. E.g., Bonobos and Chimpanzees are classified as different species despite their anatomical similarities because they differ from each other in disposition and behavior as much as any two races of mankind, and because those differences are assumed to be instinctive instead of cultural.
Celts, Eskimos and Pygmies belong to three different species of mankind according to most scientists' definition of the word "species". Why hide the fact that a branch of mankind is a separate species if a forensic anthropologist can easily identify it by looking only at one tooth, bone or skull?
Does Ancestry Influence One's Behavior?
Anyone with common sense knows that wild and even domesticated species, hybrids and individuals behave differently from each other, and that they are affected (especially when threatened or angry) by inherited survival instincts, emotions, the same non-intellectual thoughts as other animals, and sensory, etc. abilities of which they may rarely be aware.
No matter what their faith, sane farmers must realize that evolution has never domesticated a grizzly bear or any other species or race, and that civilization can not exist without artificial speciation, i.e., husbandry. Should our civilization:
- Incarcerate or segregate any individual, ethnic group or species that has an extraordinarily high rate of violence, crime and savagery (and therefore of poverty)?
- Continue to encourage the immigration, affirmative action, welfare subsidies, and religious, etc. diversity that are threatening to destroy our civilization?
- Breed out of our genepool the savage survival instincts that we need in order to compete with other races?
Is Everyone Racist?
Are groups and individuals of any age racist if:
* Their feelings, thoughts or actions are influenced by others' ancestry, e.g., if they love and/or prefer to associate with their own nationality/race, tribe, family, children, religion, sex, etc. more than with anyone else's, or gag whenever they try to kiss someone of a different race?
* They tell the truth about the behavior of other people or races, e.g., their extraordinarily high rates of rape, murder and other crimes, or poverty and low academic performance and intelligence?
Nothing enrages liers, criminals and other exploiters more than those who tell the truth that they do not want heard. Censors murder thoughts and our digital self, not just our bodies. See minute 25 of the Elon Musk interview at the World Government Summit 2017 in Dubai.
According to Stefan Molyneux, "Whomever you exploit you must first denigrate", e.g., with defamatory words like crazy, bad, sinner, prostitute, hateful, anti-semitic Nazi, racist pig, etc.
The American Anthropological Association & Censorship
Family, Clan, Tribal, National and Racial Identity
The following is a summary of the political agenda, opinions and goals expressed by the Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association (AAA), e.g., via the links below:
- Only one race and species of mankind exists.
- "Race" has been scientifically proven to NOT be a real, natural phenomenon.
- NONE of the inequalities between so-called "racial" groups are caused by genetic differences. All of them are caused by world-wide historical and contemporary social, economic, educational, political and religious circumstances (i.e., racism and tribalism).
- The folk myth of genetic and racial differences is a pernicious world-wide social mechanism that was invented by evil American slavers during the 18th century, in order to justify and rationalize prejudice, inequality, exploitation, slavery, genocide and the ideology of National Socialism.
- All racial identities are false, and should be eliminated by the secular and religious mass broadcast mediaocracy, etc. via propaganda.
- Euphemisms that are related to geography, skin color and ethnicity should be used instead of the scientific names of races, e.g., in all government census, etc. records.
- "It is important to recognize the racial categories to which individuals have been assigned historically in order to be vigilant about the elimination of discrimination" (i.e., affirmative action?).
The AAA's anti-speciation web pages at:
imply that expressions that are contrary to some of its opinions above may be hate speech that leads to a holocaust.
Column # 5 (row # 2)
Can Civilization Survive Without Freedom of Speech?
According to the American Bar Association, In this country there is no right to speak fighting words — those words without social value, directed to a specific individual, that would provoke a reasonable member of the group about whom the words are spoken. For example, a person cannot utter a racial or ethnic epithet to another if those words are likely to cause the listener to react violently. However, under the First Amendment, individuals do have a right to speech that the listener disagrees with and to speech that is offensive and hateful.
The First Amendment limits only what our government can do to restrict speech. Should there be a law that protects our right to hear the truth via any public or private forum on the Internet? Should any business, organization or private person who violates that right in any way be allowed to use the Internet? For example, the owners of Youtube and Google temporarily delay some of the above links to web sites that they dislike (wait for about 30 seconds for them to open after you click on them).