Native dna Senator

Question

I don't know if we can talk about living people here on G2G, but whoever is managing the profile of US Senator Elizabeth Warren will probably want to look at her DNA results that were released this morning to the Boston Globe. It shows she has Native Indians ancestry from 6 to 10 generations ago.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/10/15/read-results-warren-dna-test/mBPi8QxENhtHHTP2B1fFBO/story.html?p1=Article_Related_Box_Article

There is supposed to be an accompanying video with some explanations on her website.

edit: added her mother's ID

edit: request to remove mother's profile Reed-10478, so replaced with claimed native american ancestor. Does anyone know how to enter the DNA results into wikitree ?

edit: another profile in her ancestry that mentions an Indian territory census for a white relative is https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Gorman-2203

Comments

Link to the report (PDF in color)

---

Well, this will add more to the controversy!

---

Yes. I'm not sure how things work in the US, but in Canada, as far as I know, % DNA is not usually a qualifier for Indigenous status - based on the rules in Alberta (I'm not sure about other provinces), at least one parent must be Native, or a grandparent that lost status due to marriage, and in most cases, acceptance and/or involvement in which ever community you're claiming to be from is required.

According to the very minimal research I have done, most North Americans who's families have been on the continent for multiple generations will have some trace of Native DNA, however trace % of dna is mostly irrelevant to current "cultural status" and/or experience. There is also some skepticism about the accuracy of test algorithms still especially when only a small amount of data is available for a specific population. Despite all this, it is certainly entertaining to do the tests and useful for find and verifying connections.

---

I agree regarding trace DNA being irrelevant to "current cultural status," especially in terms of racial identity and everyday life experience. 

My understanding is that in the USA, it's a matter of "blood quantum %." I found a couple of interesting article that address DNA testing and Native American ancestry. 

1.Tribal Enrollment and Genetic Testing http://genetics.ncai.org/tribal-enrollment-and-genetic-testing.cfm

2.How Do I Legally Prove Native American Ancestry? by Henry Louis Gates Jr. and NEHGS Researcher Meaghan E.H. Siekmanhttps://www.theroot.com/how-do-i-legally-prove-native-american-ancestry-1790877932

3.Proving Native American Ancestry Using DNA by Roberta Estes https://dna-explained.com/2012/12/18/proving-native-american-ancestry-using-dna/

---

6-10 generations is probably more than noise. But in this case, I think it's a little silly to finger-wag about cultural status since the whole point of the test was to prove a family tradition. She grew up literally right next to a reservation.

---

I mean, this is really pretty hilarious to me. Last year people were saying her family tradition didn't count, and now the DNA doesn't count.

---

I want to upvote this comment.

---

In my Lenape tribe (Kansas Delaware), I had to show proof of who my ancestor was, not that I had a trace of Native American DNA (which I do).  I am a REGISTERED NATIVE AMERICAN, case closed.  If a person who claims to be Native American, and has no idea how they are related, then they are not. It's not a club nor is it a sporting event where one scores!  If one does not do the time to investigate and know their native ancestors, then Native American ancestry must not be the priority.  The Senator's public comments are an embarrassment and demeaning to any proud American Native.  She has less American Native blood than the average American.  Now that's saying something!

---

Kirt, I like  your post and agree totally with you.

---

For those who have not viewed the report:

 There appears to be one huge disclaimer... "For Native American references, we used samples within the 1000 Genomes project of Native American ancestry; these samples come from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia. (It is not possible to use Native American reference sequences from inside the United States, since Native American groups within the US have not chosen to participate in recent population genetics studies.) The 1000 Genomes reference samples come from Nigerian Yoruba individuals (for Sub-Saharan Africa), Finnish, Tuscan Italian, and Spanish individuals (for Europe), and northern Chinese individuals for East Asia. (The latter reference was used to test for East Asian regional ancestry, since that can otherwise be mis-assigned as Native American)." page 3 of report.

---

Most are discussing it HERE

Answer 1

Thank you, N, for telling us about this and thank you Aaron for the PDF.

Very interesting.  I must admit, I am surprised that she has any Native American ancestry, however distant, and congratulate her on the courage it took to do the DNA test.  She could have been completely wrong.

From Snopes, "she put herself on the “Minority Law Teacher” list as Native American) in the faculty directory of the Association of American Law Schools, and that Harvard Law School at one time promoted Warren as a Native American faculty member." I think she can safely claim she is of European descent (95+%) and stop trying to benefit from her early colonial Native American ancestry.

Pretty much, if you can't name your Native American ancestor and what tribe they were from, you can assume you are not a Native American.  I have a percentage of Neanderthal DNA, but I don't consider myself a Neanderthal, at least most of the time.

Comments

Actually, she did name her putative NA ancestor, her great-great-great-grandmother O.C. Sarah Smith. And, yeah, Cherokee. So

* specifically named ancestor (O.C. Sarah Smith)

* specifically named tribe (Cherokee)

* present and active family tradition

* grew up in community next to Cherokee reservation

* DNA results roughly consistent with the claimed degree of ancestry

---

Well that's great news! She is on the right track now. She should apply to O.C. Sarah Smith's tribe for membership.  Let the tribe (Cherokee nation?) decide on her status.  I believe they would take her DNA test into account for their decision.

There is a big difference between having a Native American ancestor and being Native American.

---

She didn't list her native ancestry in order to gain a benefit, she listed it to help make a connection with the community. She was in the law business and wanted to help people. It was an altruistic action.

---

LOL You said that's what it takes in your OP, and now that you see she meets the criteria that you set yourself, you're changing them.

---

You got me there, Ben.  I just hate to see benefits set for one group being used/misused by non-group individuals.  For a while, people were going to great lengths to be listed as a "minority owned" business, including claiming Native American ancestry when they were not in a Native American tribe.  I think those kinds of benefits should be reserved for tribe members.  But as you say, it is simply my opinion.

---

O.C. was apparently b in North Carolina and died in Tennessee.  https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Smith-99988 

---

Not really relevant, but might be amusing … The way words go in and out of style is very funny - this is about the first time I ever encountered the phrase "native American".  When my oldest son was applying to colleges, I had to fill out the financial aid form.  One question asked about ethnicity and had choices - African American, Hispanic American, Native American, and Other.  I was accustomed to seeing Caucasian as a choice, but it wasn't there.  I scratched my head a few times, then selected Native American, since my son was born in the United States.

I later received a letter from the federal government asking what tribe I belong to and what reservation I live on, but I didn't make any connection between that and the form I had previously filled out.  I wrote back telling them that I am not an Indian, therefore don't belong to any tribe and I live in a suburb of New York City, which is not on any reservation.

They responded with a nasty threatening letter telling me that there are penalties for making false claims to being Native American, etc.

---

Hah! Oh Gaile that is something... bureaucracy is just amazing. My best friend was once filling out a job application. It had two questions: "I sometimes use drugs" and "I used to use drugs". She was scratching her head, as she has never been on a drug more potent than an Aspirin. Finally she scratched through them and wrote "I have never used drugs."

---

We should keep in mind that this test did not go into enough detail to identify what side of the family the Native American heritage is on. When you get back to 4th-great grandparents (and beyond) it's not certain that you will get ANY DNY from a specific ancestor. So this could even be from her father's side.

Of course, let's not forget that such testing is of unknown reliability. So it supports the theory that Sen Warren has Native American ancestry - but doesn't really PROVE it.

I disagree that this took any "courage" whatsoever. Sen Warren did not make it public that she was doing this. If it came out saying she had NO Native American DNA she could simply have not disclosed the results. I would further suggest that the extra number-crunching her expert performed was probably only done because the basic result that she got without doing that was not to her liking.

Plus, as I've said elsewhere, this was never about "having Native American ancestry" - it was about falsely claiming to actually BE a Native American, which it was already obvious she is not.

---

You don't seem to be able to answer my question, Frank, which suggests to me that you don't actually have a good answer for the problem of how to indicate degrees of ancestry when you're only given binary options. Warren has always been very clear that she's not claiming to be an enrolled member of any tribe, or that she has a high degree of Indian ancestry. All she has ever claimed was that her family has always said they were part Cherokee several generations back. She had a survey that had "Native American" on it and since she honestly believed she was part Native American, she checked it. Is it her fault that people who make these forms don't think about issues like this? Hey, if someone gives me a list of ethnicities, I can check a lot of them too. I'm Irish, but not Irish. I'm German, but not German. I'm Dutch, but not Dutch. The only difference is that some politico didn't make a big kerfluffle about what I am to score points with a bunch of wahoos.
I know a guy who is literally the chief of a small band of California indians, the Luisenos, who still live literally in the same place their tribe has lived since the missions were built. He looks like an Indian, he goes to powwows, he shows up to protest construction on Indian graveyards, they eat ******* fry bread like everybody else. But his tribe is not one of the 573 Federally recognized tribes. He's probably not "pure Indian" - but like who is? I seriously doubt you could possibly get more Indian than this guy, but more than likely this little tribe of a couple dozen people will never, ever be Federally recognized, so like 10s of millions of other Americans, he will never officially be an Indian to you. What should he check, Frank?

Answer 2

Here's a typical American genealogist:

"I'm descended from Charlemagne - I have royal blood!" (35 generations back)

"I'm a Magna Carta descendant - I even have a Wikitree badge!" (25 generations back)

"I should be able to get into the DAR because my ancestor was in the Revolution." (8 generations back)

"Elizabeth Warren can't claim Indian ancestry because it was 6 generations back."

Comments

That's funny.

I don't know that the folks that do the first three things are the same as the ones saying the last thing, but yeah, I laughed ;)

---

There's a society for descendants of New Sweden I could join. If I did that doesn't mean I'm claiming to be a Swede.

See the difference? It's not even close to the same thing.

As to the last point, Sen Warren did not simply "claim Indian ancestry" - she claimed to actually BE a Cherokee.

If she was claiming the former, she's got a plausible (but really still unproven) case. The new DNA evidence adds to her case, but is of unknown reliability.

But she was claiming the latter, and no DNA test was ever going to have any relevance, unless she found an NPE or something, could later prove it, and joined a tribe.

---

Well, so your position is that someone can't characterize themselves as belonging to a particular ethnicity unless they're 100% pure?

---

All she did was check a box that said "Native American". The box did not have a sliding scale on it for % Native American and it seems rather unlikely that they had an option for "Native-American-American". How would you, Frank, suggest that someone who was verifiably some percentage Native American indicate that they were Native American on an information form that has no type of "Native American" category other than one that says "Native American"?

---

The box didn’t ask “do you have a percentage of DNA from any of the following? “  the form had definitions one of which read, “American Indian or Alaska Native: a person having origins in any of the original people of the Americas  [emphasis mine] and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition.”   From the OMB, May 12, 1977.  The other options (until 1995) were Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, Hispanic, or White.  Respondents were limited to one choice.  If a person failed to respond the person collecting the information could fill out the form for them based on their observation/opinion.   The instructions go on to say that persons of mixed backgrounds be reported in the category which most closely reflects the person’s recognition in the community.  

---

Obviously, I would suggest, Ben, that a normal, honest person with her heritage would simply check "White". Her Native American roots, to the extent they exist, were irrelevant to whatever form you are talking about. It's real simple - countless thousands of Americans likely do exactly that every single day.

[BTW, I don't know who flagged you on your "purity" strawman. I don't really see a problem with it, myself.]

---

That doesn't make sense, Frank. If you did believe you had Native American ancestry and you were being honest, and you interpreted it as including anyone with Native American ancestry, it would be dishonest if you didn't check it.

---

" and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition.” 

First, the OMB definition is not necessarily the one used by this law school.

But even if it was, how did she know she had Native American ancestry? Because her family said told her. This isn't like she just woke up one morning and said "I want to be a Cherokee." If she only had the DNA, I would agree that there's no requisite cultural element, but family is a community, it is a cultural element. If you read what she's said about it, it sounds to me like some of her relatives were actually pretty into it.

---

The collection of this information was required of all colleges and universities that received Federal funds by the government  (I know about it first hand because I was one of the people who had to explain, collect, and record the information at the university I worked at).  The Feds made the rules and we followed them.  I don’t recall ever seeing, hearing, or reading that Elizabeth Warren even suggested that she or any of her relatives had any cultural connection to the Cherokee.

---

"There's a society for descendants of New Sweden I could join. If I did that doesn't mean I'm claiming to be a Swede."

Hence I infer that what you're saying is "I cannot claim to be a Swede because I'm not completely Swedish." If what you meant was "I cannot claim to be a Swede because I am not a Swedish citizen," I don't think that's really relevant, since neither the conventional sense of the term or (e.g.) OMB's definition requires legal citizenship.

---

"I don’t recall ever seeing, hearing, or reading that Elizabeth Warren even suggested that she or any of her relatives had any cultural connection to the Cherokee."

I guess you missed the whole Pow Wow Cookbook? Look, I'm not saying that Elizabeth Warren was plucked out of pre-Columbian America or anything, but is this really all that different from those very thinly Irish-Americans among us who associate St Patrick primarily with green beer and leprechauns?

---

I think it’s pretty simple: You can’t claim to be Cherokee unless you are a citizen of one of the three recognized tribes, because “Cherokee” isn’t a race it’s three nations with a treaty relationship to the United States. You can’t claim to be a Cherokee descendant unless you’re actually descended from a Cherokee person.

---

And no, it’s not the same.  Irish Americans may have been discriminated against 150 years ago, but they aren’t today.  They were never subjected to a government policy of genocide by the United States, and they are not  marginalized and discriminated against as Native Americans are to this day. I’m guessing you wouldn’t claim to have an ancestor who was imprisoned or died  in a Nazi concentration camp unless it was true.  That’s the analogy, not the “wearin o’ the green.”

Answer 3

1) Elizabeth Warren never received any hiring or promotion preference as a minority.  Read the Boston Globe research.

2) There is no “Cherokee Reservation” in Oklahoma, never was.  By the time her family moved to Oklahoma there were five to seven times more whites than Indians there.  

3) The  ancestor Warren claimed as Cherokee has no connection to any documented Cherokee person.  

4) Her “Native American” DNA match was to reference samples from South America.

5) She may have traces of Native DNA and a distant, unknown, Native ancestor, but she has no cultural connection to any recognized tribe.  If she was Cherokee, hundreds if not thousands of Cherokee people would claim her as a cousin.

Comments

Aha. So you think she's actually a Yanomami? This is indeed a very well reasoned and logical position you have staked out.

It's true that there is no longer a "Cherokee reservation" in OK per se since Oklahoma mostly now has "tribal jurisdictional areas" which are officially called "Former Indian Reservations of Oklahoma."

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/maps/tribal/2010_Tribal_Jurisdiction_Map.pdf

---

I guess it's also technically true that there never was a Cherokee reservation in "Oklahoma", but there was a Cherokee reservation in the territory that became Oklahoma.

---

I have no idea who Elizabeth Warren’s Native ancestor might be,  I only know that there is nothing that connects any of her ancestors going back to the mid-1700's to the  Cherokee.

---

According to Tribal Enrollment and Genetic Testing  no DNA testing can “prove” an individual is American Indian and/or Alaska Native, or has ancestry from a specific tribe.

---

I think many people here are completely missing the point.  She's not trying to become 'Indian', not trying to join a tribe, not trying to take advantage of it.  She like many had family stories of an Indian ancestor, and she was attacked for speaking about it.  She like many have a real interest in whether they do have Native American ancestry, and all she and they want to know is whether it can be confirmed. Period.  So what's the big deal here?  Many of us have very boring all European ancestry, and it's cool to find something more exotic.

---

This comment is for Rob Jacobson.  Sounds like white privilege to me.  I'm not racist, I just don't think she is clear in her thinking.  These are usually very underprivileged people who were forced off their lands,  I should know, I am one of the ancestors who was to be forced to move from Kansas to Oklahoma on the trail of tears.   Not shedding a single tear for her.  Her claiming her native heritage was politically motivated as a part of inclusion..  I don't like it!

---

Kirt, I'm sorry but it doesn't sound like you read a word I said, or read the story either.  Someone must have told you she was trying to claim being a Native American, and now you're upset, and have basically attacked her 3 times.  SHE HASN'T CLAIMED ANYTHING!  Before you say any more, PLEASE read the story for yourself, and read what I wrote.

She's just a person like many of us with a family story of a Native American ancestor, and she mentioned it to others.  She took an interest in it at Harvard, but doesn't appear to have intentionally claimed any privilege there either.  And after being attacked for relating the story, she decided to defend her integrity and get tested, and the test shows she was right, a rather typical amount of early Native American admixture.  Are you going to be upset with all of the rest of us for peeking at our DNA, and looking to see if we have some too?  That is ALL she was doing!

Answer 4

It's just this simple.  What is her registration number with her Tribe?  Surly her kin have registered with her tribe, so this should be easy right?  With all her staff, and the library of congress, it comes down to less than 1% Native American as proof through DNA?  Has she provided proof that she is currently on the rolls with her tribe.  No contact offered as proof?  Show me her tribal card issued to her with supportive evidence of who her ancestor is.  Easy peeezy if she is legit, and it doesn't take a year, only a day with the tribal rolls administrator.

Comments

Kirt, get off your high horse. First off, if indeed you are native American or have any such ancestry Elizabeth Warren is the best political friend you can have, or do you prefer the liar in chief, and his tribe of greedy racists. 

As far as I know she isn't claiming to be NA, or getting any benefits from that claim. But she is no different than hundreds of thousands of other Americans, including many who post on wikitree, that make the claim, and in her case she boldly stepped forth and took the test.

That took moxie. Her problem is that she should have mimicked her opposition, ignore the comments and double down, but she is not a liar.

Whatever she held forth, she was speaking truth as she knows it, problem is that too darn many whites, who are racist otherwise, claim to be native American ancestry, yet if they lived near a reservation they would avoid it and any such self identification.

This whole thread is ironic, given that it is taking place in an environment where so many are obsessed with DNA tests to prove that they should wear lederhosen or kilt.

And in this age of obscene education costs, people are performing all kinds of documentation tricks to obtain a scholarship, public or private, for their children to attend college.

The other day I received a request from a way distant cousin for info, that her daughter could get a DAR scholarship, my sister once tried to get a NA based scholarship on the basis of a family myth. I had to break it to her that it was a myth, that DNA showed no such ancestry.

While at it. The last paragraph of the report

Conclusion. While the vast majority of the individual’s ancestry is European, the results strongly support the existence of an unadmixed Native American ancestor in the individual’s pedigree, likely in the range of 6-10 generations ago. 

FYI, 6 generations is one's 3rd great grandparents, which is what she claimed.

Start counting generations with yourself as Gen 1, that is how it is done.

One should not trust autosomal DNA for anything past Gen 7 or 4th great grandparents, especially not out to Gen 10 .

Answer 5

It is different depending where you are - now in the United States of America if you do not have tribal enrollment it does not matter your percentage - if you left that world behind - as my family did it is not going to count as far as any benefit for you - but In Canada it is different and was different when my mothers family was there - actually the border moved under them really, she did not cross a line the border appeared under them and she was on the side that it was not good to be Native so they chose to not be - if it would have been a bit further north a different outcome would have come about - there land could be owned by First Nations people - here in the US they were not eligible for Homestead Lands so "passed for white" and as a mixed blood woman who married a white man she got away with it

Every family has culture that was lost along the way do to decisions involving survival so maybe we should not judge so harshly the claims one makes trying to reach out and find some of that lost culture

Comments

xxxxx

---

Interesting.

But to be clear, "trying to reach out and find some of that lost culture" is not what this was ever about. There's a difference between that and passing yourself off as an actual member of that "lost culture".

A DNA test was never going to mean anything in that regard. She had no affiliation with any tribe, and it was well known that if she had any Native American ancestry at all, you'd have to apply a "just one drop" mentality to call her a Native American minority, and it's obviously just not reasonable.

I have a 6th-great grandmother who was Swedish - the descendant of New Sweden settlers. I could join a society that exists for descendants (and maybe I will someday), but that isn't the same thing as declaring myself to be a Swede, and if I "identified as a Swede" that would be ridiculous..

---

How interesting, yet people with as much African DNA as Warren has Native American DNA are readily classified as African Americans by their fellow Americans. Americans so readily judge and classify then rreat or mistreat people by the color of their skin, don't they? Especially those of anti progressive mentality.

How do you classify or consider a person who is 50/50? Why always by the darker complexion?

Then there are the descendants of Edward Mozingo, an African indentured servant in Colonial Virginia. He served his time, released from his indenture, given a musket, some seed and a piece of land on Pantico Run.

His descendants run the gamut from an Alabama Judge who considers himself white, proud members of the KKK, and blacks who live in NC.

He, married another freed indentured servant, this a white woman, in an era before Virginia enacted anti miscegenation laws.

https://www.amazon.com/Fiddler-Pantico-Run-African-Descendants/dp/1451627483/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1540392237&sr=8-1&keywords=fiddler+on+pantico+run

And there is a Surname project for Mozingo at FTDNA, but, not surprisingly, all the members have opted for keeping the results private.

Answer 6

Senator Warren's family told her that ancestor Sarah (SMITH) Crawford had some native Indian heritage. I have been working on her line and have added some info to that Sarah's father Wyatt SMITH. I question whether this Wyatt is attached to a wrong German father. I have added a transcription list of Wyatt and a bunch of his sibling heirs.  I still don't know the father's name but am planning to work on it some more.

Wyatt Smith https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Smith-35544

Comments

This discussion just goes to show how inane and ridiculous the discussion about ethnicity?. I don't get it. People who don't give a rats about genealogy, will test for ethnicity. And ethnicity, especially for Europeans is a joke. Invasions, migrations, wars. 

What is an Englishman? He is a hodgepodge of ethnicities. Norse, Dane, Saxon, Celtic and each of those are a hodgepodge of ethnicities.

What is a German? Romans had different names for different persons, and German was used in a macro geographical sense.

Certainly there are dominant DNA haplogroups in each country or region.

The British Isles, especially England is evidence of his.

I guess his begs he question of "what is an ethnicity" or how do we define an ethnicity.?

Arab is an ethnicity based on the native tongue and self identity of the speaker.

Although Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs are all Slavs (which are themselves of varied ancestry), they define themselves (basically) by religion or they accept the definition given them based on name attributed to their country/region.

Bosnians are descended from Bogomil Christians who converted to Islam after the Turks invaded. Croatians are Reman Catholics as they were under the rule of Romans. Serbs are Greek Orthodox for their were under the rule of Constantinople.

As regards Amerindian ancestry.  I have to choke back when folk who would  die if it was revealed that they had African DNA, proudly claim (and often falsely) that they AmerIndian ancestry, and this is most often a quality found amongst those who live below the Mason Dixon line.

Yet many of us are "victims" of tall tales handed down in the family. Sometimes to explain how a family of blue eyes, shows up with a child or line of brown eyes  or some other characteristic or mixture. A tactic to cover up the "milkman".

Sometimes pure fantasy for "bragging rights", a claim that the family has roots in this continent that predate the Anglo Saxon invasion, and subsequent genocide or near genocide (no genocide is complete).

And when it comes to AmerIndian Ancestry. Subject is muddled by politics, history and economics.  

Kim Tallbear says Tribal Culture can't be bottled. While true. The subject is not Tribal Culture. Whites have married into native Tribes for centuries and their descendants, living in those tribes, identify with that tribe ex:Quanah Parker.

But a person who has not been raised in an Ameriiandian culture cannot claim to be AmerIndian as they have endured the hardships nor enjoyed the blessings of being of a Native American tribe. And as regards NA culture, there isn't one, but many and the one thing they have in common is mistreatment , persecution, theft and murder by the caucasoids who pushed them off their land

I agree that ancestry testing is stupid use of science, not necessarily stupid science as an indigenous resarcher said here: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/dna-testing-indigenous-ancestry-1.4705797

Considering that the vast majority of humans are (for lack of a better word) mongrels. Then why pursue the subject.

Hint: "you are probably "entitled" to wear a lederhosen as well as a kilt, and a wide range of so called national or ethnic garb.

Any Greeks want to wear this costume?

In my not so humble opinion, testing for ethnicity is a stupid waste of time and money. I for one am not in the least bit interested.

I might have a snippet of DNA that is commonly found in this or that group of people, but it is only a snippet. As regards my ethnicity, well that is North American. For it is the traditions, values, cultures dialects or accents, histories (plural on purpose), in which I was raised and amongst which I have lived.

Unfortunately people who have their own motives (racial, religous, political) present us with forms that have forced choices.

If a person has a German mother and an Irish father are they German or Irish, but how about a person with a black father and a white mother

Like these adorable twins Lucy and Marie Aylmer

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-baby-with-a-black-dad-and-white-mom-appear-completely-Caucasian-with-light-straight-hair-blue-eyes-and-pale-skin-with-no-mixed-look-to-it

Answer 7

posted this in one topic about this- here is recent viewpoint by 2 Amerindian Geneticists who have looked at the actual test that was done, and the results and what results mean scientifically to them

https://www.indianz.com/News/2018/10/23/two-native-american-geneticists-interpre.asp

Answer 8

Kim TallBear first book, "Native American DNA: Tribal Belonging and the False Promise of Genetic Science" (2013) University of Minnesota Press. book discusses the marketing of DNA testing as something capable of determining ancestry and race, and problematizes this by discussing the ways in which it shades into racial science.

- Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate (North Dakota, USA) professor, specializing in racial politics in science
- educated at the University of Massachusetts at Boston, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and University of California, Santa Cruz
- anthropologist specialising in the intersection of science and technology with culture
- member of the Council of the Native American and Indigenous Studies Association
- late 2016 became the first ever Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Peoples, Technoscience and Environment, at the University of Alberta
- frequent media commentator on issues of Tribal membership, genetics and identity