Elizabeth Hunter King (Parker), Old Cheraw - Elizabeth "Betsy" May (King)

I checked the Revisions tab and the person who changed the parents is Sean C. Wright. I would suggest you contact him or her.

@Unknown Profile
Do you have a source for the change you made?

I'm not sure, what change did I make a merge? "matching on the chromosome 3 segment as identified in the profile description. " What does that even mean? I think some of you look too much into the autosomal DNA without the proper knowledge of the subject. The North Carolina, Marriage Index, 1741-2004 has him marrying Elizabeth Sharp, or at least that is how I descend from him. Maybe you came from the Indian. Change it back if you choose.
And Marsha, it's HE.

When you take about 150 people's work together on this from 2017-2018 and you study the autosomic story which in the case of America's Most Wanted has pin pointed 14 of the most wanted and our type of genetic geneology was done according to the same standards with ISOGG methodology and is able to be reverified by any in a public place, then I would think we don't need schooling on the proper knowledge of our atDna work, which stands on the shoulders of DNA Detectives as trained to us in their researcher, Tushanna Corkern. That Sharp indeed could be a wife. Let us have your kit and we will compare you to about 200 Sharp cousins whose kits we have in 23andMe which is group chromosomed browsed for us, so there would not be any trouble knowing how and where it is that you match to them and the Parker cousins could absolutely determine if there is a valid relationship here, as well the King contingient who were part of the study.

Might want to make sure that when you are talking in the phrase, "Maybe you come from the Indian", the more preferred term would be indigenious, which yes, Dianne et al do come from the indigenious and fact be told the Sharp were Germans from Moravia who picked up many a St Thomas Islander (on record and not just the atDna) of which we could probably tell you more if you were interested. So, let's have a look at your kit number. What is it

Team Coordinator for Team N8V

@Dianne Marie Dearring, A644121, if you really had a question for me, a private message would have been preferred.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mg2-O4am4Y

@David Creamer, i didnt read all that you wrote. I dont have the time or the interest to invest in it. I posted a youtube link to My True Ancestry dna results.
Do as you wish with the tree and you guys can pretend to be whatever you choose and i wont stand in your way.
Have a nice day and God Bless.

Unknown Profile, thanks for sharing that video. I hadn't seen one of those before. I believe your point in sharing it is that it shows you don't have any Ancient America DNA (around 5:17 in the video). I'm no expert, but I do think that the Ancient America DNA investigations are still in the infancy stage. I think we'll learn a lot more in the years to come.
With regard to the discussion, I was taught by some of the curators that it's best to have a discussion for these types of conflicts so that folks with a vested interest can all contribute to the discussion..
I'm using my aunt's and her first cousin's DNA for research on my mother's side of my tree for these more distant ancestors. They both have confirmed/triangulated matches to Elizabeth Betsy May (you can also see them on the DNA tab for her here at geni). I would love to compare our DNA and then take it the step further to confirm our common ancestors further back. Do you have your DNA at Gedmtch or FTDNA? If you would share it with me, that would be great.
Thank you,
Dianne

Thank you Dianne Marie Dearring, A644121

for me: Elizabeth "Betsy" May is your fourth great grandmother. I also have other connections to her. Haven't quite determined how these changes effect me but I do have atDNA and would be happy to work on these questions. FTDNA, 23&me, Gedmatch. Please advise how to proceed in this effort. Also, I'm documented to her daughter Charlotte Lottie.

We arent here to do what we want. We are here to proove an autosomic story in the standards provided. The Berry and Floyd disconnections of late are a case where a person who doesn't know atDna disconnected our hard earned SNPs. IF Geni really is collaborative, the atDna should be included. If people who test are just testing to spend money, that is not us. We are in this for the atDna story and disconnect whomever without collaboration and the atDna is still what it is despite peoples inability to reverify. If anyone needs a tutoring lesson on how to reverify as Signature SNP that we pain stakingly over time chromosome mapped backed to, like the FLoyd and Berry, it would be great if they would at least put in the Discussion what they are thinking.

@David Creamer, once again I didn't read all your screed,but if you want to disconnect me from this line because it doesnt fall within your parameters, then by all means do so and you people stop mentioning me in your diatribes and leave me alone.

@Diane Marie Dearring, the video graphic actually says
Note: Our tests do detect you have some indigenous ancestry- unfortunately not enough to make any sample matches at this time.

Marsha Gail Kamish, please go ahead and reverse the changes that Sean made. Thank you.

Sorry, but that's not in my bag of tricks. I can unmerge fairly easily but if you want to reconnect relationships and can't figure it out yourself, you must send me the URLs to each of the parties and tell me exactly which URL needs to be connected to which other URL and the relationship between the two. Thanks!

Marsha Gail Kamish, Can one of the other curators do it? I don't have the right access to unmerge.

The trouble is it wasn't a merge, it was a disconnection. I could do an unmerge for you but all I saw was a disconnection. I don't know enough about these profiles to search for the right Elizabeth and the right parents. As I said, if you send me the URLs to the right people and tell me what the relationship should be, I can reconnect them for you.

Chose the Parker mom and gave the autosomic reason as to why. Done. Thanks all.

Private I have a friend that is a twist hair and beard tribe of the Cherokee and he says DNA is inadmissible to join the tribe. So what you're doing is disingenuous and cultural appropriation.

David, I can speak personally to the Floyd issues, as I was responsible for pointing out the problems with the paper trail (such as it was).

The Floyds west of the Chesapeake Bay and the Floyds on the Eastern Shore are *two different families*. It has long, and incorrectly, been believed that they were connected (more recently than the Jamestown settlement, at least) - partly because the Eastern Shore Floyds have a pretty good paper trail back to first known settler John Floyd, of Northampton County, while the western Floyds are spottily documented at best before about 1750.

The immediate issue was the parentage of William J Floyd, II, who had been attributed to a "John Floyd" who turned out to be undocumented and unfindable. Instead, primary evidence was found that his father's name was William:

http://www.ncgenweb.us/ncgranville/other/orph-bnd.htm

Citation

Orphan Bonds of Granville County, North Carolina, 1749-1786. Transcribed and submitted by Deloris Williams: www.ncgenweb.us/.

Notes

Dec. 4, 1750 – George Floyd, 18 years old, William Floyd, 14 yrs. old, orphans of Wm. Floyd, bound to Jos. Kimball Sr., to learn the art and mistery of a blacksmith

His mother's name remains undocumented.

No further primary evidence has surfaced, yet, as to the origins of William Floyd Sr.

(DNA evidence is not helpful in this context, as to my knowledge no Eastern Shore Floyds have volunteered for testing.)

Sean. this isn't appropriation of culture or tribal nationism. It's just atDna.

Mavis, I will use a line from Sean that I didn't read all of your post because I have the primary source of the John Floyd ydna lines which is always helpful and rock solid and goes to the group of Floyds on the ship manifest from Andalusia. Like Sean said, you can do what you want with the Berry and Floyds as they are confligrated on Geni but not to the hundreds of cousins who got it tidy on the autosomic and it would not have been possible without DNA. So, do whatever you want with the Floyds, as you have for years and we have our lines all tidy elsewhere.

You DO NOT have ANY kind of DNA evidence for the Eastern Shore Floyds. There is NO record that ANY known and documented Eastern Shore Floyd descendant has volunteered for ANY kind of DNA test. NONE.

You *cannot* compare apples to invisible kumquats.

As for Mary "maybe-a-Berry", wife of John Floyd of Northampton, we DON'T know that she really belonged to *any* Berry family. That theory is predicated on the datum that one of their sons was *called* "Berry" - but he is also on at least some official documents as Benjamin. And we DON'T have any kind of DNA evidence for her, same as we don't have any for the Eastern Shore Floyds.

Even if she should be found to be a Berry, there were Berry families on the Eastern Shore that had *absolutely nothing* to do with the Lumbee Berrys.One of them moved on up to Maryland. One of them is thought to have maybe been Huguenot. One was possibly Dutch (the Cornelius Berrys).

You stay on your side of the Chesapeake and I'll stay on mine.

Mavin, talk to the wind on it. Hundreds of folks for years worked the lines backwards. We chromosome mapped it back to the ship manifest folks just like we had it before you disconnected it. You get to be boss of your Geni confligration lines as you like. We don't need it. Neither does the Floyd Association care and has left the discussion twice specifically because of you. Same with Trader Hughes lines. Geni isn't the end all as it is collaborative. So, you get to collaborate with your own notes. Gedmatch has a feature in Tier One where it clusters the atDna the users of the App that finds the MRCA to a clustered group. It isn't rocket science. And, yes, we have 10,000 users on Tier One's auto clustering that goes to a Gedcom.

I just had a thought. There is a Northampton County in North Carolina, which is easily and carelessly confused with Northampton County, Virginia. They aren't all that close to one another, as Northampton County, Virginia is the lower end of (and in earlier times was the whole of) the Virginia Eastern Shore. Northampton County, North Carolina is a good ways inland from the coast, just south of the Virginia/North Carolina border and (nowadays) mostly just east of I-95.

People who go on about "Northampton County" need to be *very* specific as to *which* Northampton County they are talking about. (If you think that's bad, Frederick County, Maryland and Frederick County, Virginia are so close geographically that they are *always* getting mixed up with each other!)

Maybe David won't bother to read this because TLDR, but I hope some other people do.

Show me, David. Show me what you are talking about. What ship? What manifest? When? From where? To where?

Show me PRIMARY documentation, not somebody's account written generations later.

And yet once again I say to you ALL: BEWARE THE EMMA SIGGINS WHITE FALLACY!

People with the same surname *are not* necessarily related to each other. They may not *ever* have been related to each other. Emma Siggins White created one holy helluva mess for White researchers because she did not grasp this basic fact - and had selfish reasons for *not* wanting to grasp it. (She wanted her husband's ancestors to be glamorous aristocrats instead of the humble shepherds they were.)

Let's get one point clarified. *I* was not the person who disconnected the line you are complaining about. I found an error in the assumed descent, found the evidence that proved there was an error, pointed this out to a curator, and *they* took it from there.

Do not - *ever* - take any book as Holy Writ, Guaranteed Infallible. Let Emma Siggins White be a Horrible Example of just how horrifically wrong *that* can go when someone wants to "prove" something for which there is either no evidence - or, worse yet, *contradicting* evidence.

Private

Read and learn.
Note: I normally don't support Huff Post or any leftist fake journalism, but this article nails it, somewhat.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/opinion-warren-cherokee-dna_n_5bc63a...

"Research by Kim TallBear, a professor of Native Studies at the University of Alberta, has established that there are no genetic markers of Native ancestry. In her book, Native American DNA: Tribal Belonging and the False Sense of Genetic Science, TallBear observes that tribal membership is a legal category, not a genetic one. She points out that it is impossible to disentangle individual genetic information from the constellations of family relations, reservation histories, tribal rules and government regulations in which genes are formed."

Private User, when David uses my name, it's not my exact words he is using, he is using something I said over an unrelated family. I am not against you, this argument is between you guys.

When I use Seans' name, it is to make a point that the link of the Sen Warren case is that her Reed grandparents on the wrong side of the track were dissed and once she became a bar applicant, she put her self identification to get nothing and received nothing. Her Reeds were Chowanoke. She nor most do this because they want to be cultural about it. Also the article is wrong on the premise that you can't find your native ancestry with atDna EVEN on the alleles because a lay person can do the Admixture app and find out with a few clicks just like the pro's did with Warren's and found exactly where and how she is native descending. Now, directed to Mavin is my directive by the Floyds to relay that since 2017 they are not interested in Mavin's supposed collaboration on their lines because as she said here, Accomack is not who they claim. Never did; but, Appotomack yes. . . based with their chromosome mapping back to just whom was put in in just the way it stipulated and was disconnected by your request on public discussion as to your opinions, while ironically you saying there are more than one Floyd line and stay on your side of the Cheasopeake; great idea. We're staying on our side of Gedcom and it has for years figured out the Fellowship of Trader 10 gens to each other. Again, lay people can revet it. After trying for years on the Sara Rawley and Sara Goodwin atDna, call these people any name you want, doesn't matter as we have the chromosome and segment and accompanying Admixture and where the paper trail is, good but not needed. We can mirror map and do back 10 gens and the names are appropriatied anyhow, so it doesn't matter on the names. Per the Floyd's and years of screen shots of this kind of on record, multiple times of report by many what is considered cyber bullying, the Floyd's asked that we just leave it. Third parties are not so interested in leaving it and are likely going to the cyber bullying complaint route; but, instead, we can take our ship primary source and denote it on Gedcom.

So instead of presenting ANY evidence, it's back to haranguing - and even, very offensively, dragging in modern politics that have nothing to do with the current discussion. Got it.

Here's the problem: "Accomack is not who they claim. Never did; but, Appotomack yes".

That is true ONLY since certain people had their noses rubbed in the fact that Accomack County is on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, on the *east* side of the Chesapeake Bay, while Appomattox County is well inland to the *west* of the Chesapeake Bay, in the upper Piedmont and nearly to the Blue Ridge.

Before then, *oh yes they did* claim Accomack County as the origin place of Col. William Floyd, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever. This belief is so old that it had become "family lore" and was written up in a Floyd family genealogy as "fact", because "the family said so". Somebody even MADE UP "evidence" to "prove" it, falsely claiming that John Floyd of Northampton County, Virginia "had" named a son William in his will.

HE. DID. NOT.

The only Williams named in the document were two *witnesses*, William Jarvis and William Shepheard.

The gist of it is as follows: John made a will on 2 April 1687 at Northampton Co, VA. To my son John my 100 A. plantation whereon I now live, a set of cooper's tools and carpenter's tools. To my sons Charles, Berry, and Mathew all my 1/4 part of Hogg Island to be eq. div. To my dau. Sarah one feather bed. To my dau. Esther one feather bed, but if she dies under 16 then to the rest of her brothers and sister. To my loving wife Mary two feather beds. My sons to be at age at 18 if their mother remarries, else 20, and daus. at 16. To my son John the 1/2 of Prouts Island. To my wife for life the use of 1/3 of my plantation. Wife Mary and my son John extrs. Witt: William Jarvis, William 'TWS' Shepheard, [Capt.] Thomas Hunt [of Northampton County, VA, not to be confused with any other Thomas Hunt residing anywhere else].

Notes in [ ] added by me for clarification.

Son "Berry" was also known as Benjamin, and it isn't clear which was his legal first name.

"Hog Island" is the Atlantic barrier island which is being eaten up by the sea and has been uninhabitable since the 1930s.

"Prouts Island" was another Atlantic barrier island, possibly since lost to the sea.

This is what happens when "family lore" gets into a book that is thereafter taken as Holy Writ.