Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
FAy
Abraham allledgedly descends from a William Womack ][unsubstantiated] thru Abraham, 1644> Thomas, 1664>
Thomas m. Louvisa.
Abraham 1644 had a brother Richard I thru which I descend.
Now, if Thomas m Louvisa was a true Womack, then his DNA
should match mine very, very closely - It doesnt. Jack
womack, a descendaNT of Thomas and Louvisa and I match 74.5%. Thats not close enough to call a cousin. Although we do claim it. For instance, I match 94.5% with a Meeks and cant find the connection for sure.
What we have now is three distinctive lines of Womacks in american, NOT GENETICALLY RELATED.
What causes this? As you probably know, adoption, taking in orphans who take the name of their "foster" parents, step parents, unsubstantiated paternities, etc..
So, in my opinion, either Abraham was not a true Womack, or he got blamed for something he didnt do.
I am not trying to negate your reseach; and if I were you I would not back off on it 1 iota.. Mine is only a theory.
Its just that it is hard to accept when my, and Abraham's, DNA should be a match close enough to be more closely related?
Thank you for your response
Sam
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:No followups yet |
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/womack/messages/1903.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|