Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl

[Chris]

At least people are out there trying to understand the information given to us. We are not just sitting back cos we 'really can't be arsed' and sniping at other's.

Can I just congratulate Tracy on a brilliant post there? Well done!

[Observer]

Hi Observer






At least people are out there trying to understand the information given to us. We are not just sitting back cos we 'really can't be arsed' and sniping at other's.

Tracy

Leave the DNA to the experts! Dr Jari Louhelainen has carried out tests on the cloth/shawl, listen to what he has to say. Forget Mr Edwards.

[Observer]

Can I just congratulate Tracy on a brilliant post there? Well done!

[ATTACH]16303[/ATTACH]

Tracy's biopolymer strands, just got another jolt.

[Chris]

Leave the DNA to the experts!

Well, of course there is that point of view, but I'm not sure where it would leave Ripperology if it were applied consistently to all the disciplines relevant to the field. History, for example.

In fact, it's a funny thing about Ripperology that when academics have ventured to contribute, their contributions have often been embarrassingly bad. I'm thinking of the history professor who told us that James Maybrick was Jack the Ripper, for example.

But seriously, there's nothing in that other thread that lies within the province of the expert. It's the kind of thing that's meat and drink to ordinary family historians these days. I'm sure you could understand it youself quite easily if you just gave it a chance.

[tji]

Can I just congratulate Tracy on a brilliant post there? Well done!

Heheheh thanks Chris -really starting to think this guy is stalking me lately


[QUOTE]

Leave the DNA to the experts!

Why?

Tracy

[Observer]

Why?

Tracy

Because the analysis of DNA is their profession? By the way, how are your studies into the wonderful World of DNA going? Ready to take your Doctorate yet?

[Chris]

Because the analysis of DNA is their profession? By the way, how are your studies into the wonderful World of DNA going? Ready to take your Doctorate yet?

Sarcasm aside, if you want to go to that other thread and explain to me what you don't understand about the point I'm making - which is really very simple in essence - I'll undertake to try and explain it, and I promise it doesn't require a doctorate, or even a three-day course.

But if on the other hand you just can't be bothered to understand, then I don't think you should criticise those who are making the effort.

[Robert]

Let's see if I've got this straight : some chap called Jerry wants to return a ladies' shawl because it's soiled. Did he buy it here? And who sold it to him - Miss Brahms or Mrs Slocombe?

Regards

Mr Rumbold

[tji]

Hi Observer

Because the analysis of DNA is their profession? By the way, how are your studies into the wonderful World of DNA going? Ready to take your Doctorate yet?

So what Chris has wrote on the thread is wrong because a 'professional' has said something different.......so if a professional came along and stated what Chris has posted then what? This mean's Chris can now be right?

What if 2 professional have different opinion's - which one is right?

So because I don't have a doctorate does this mean I am not entitled to ask question's?

Tracy

[Observer]

Well, of course there is that point of view.

Ok Chris. In your opinion, is there any part of Dr Jari's analysis which you disagree with?

[tji]

Hi Robert

What if we did a DNA test see who handled it?

Tracy

[Observer]

Hi Observer



So what Chris has wrote on the thread is wrong because a 'professional' has said something different.......so if a professional came along and stated what Chris has posted then what? This mean's Chris can now be right?

What if 2 professional have different opinion's - which one is right?

So because I don't have a doctorate does this mean I am not entitled to ask question's?

Tracy

Stay in the real world. In this instance, a professional hasn't come along and said something different. That's my whole point. Until that happens I'll stick to what Dr Jari has found. Of course you're entitled to ask questions, just as I'm entitled to inform you to leave it to the professionals.

[Monty]

THe simple answer is NO.

My understanding is that statisyically the Eddow's match is far better than the Kosminski match.

I'm far from being an expert as you know but I have been following this thread and thats what I take from it..

I think Colin Roberts gave some more accurate statistal analysis somewhere

Trust its as sunny in brumie as it is in sunstone.

Jeff

No idea Jeff, I'm not in Bimingham.

Monty

[Chris]

Ok Chris. In your opinion, is there any part of Dr Jari's analysis which you disagree with?

As I've explained on the other thread, taking at face value what Dr Louhelainen is quoted in the book as saying, yes.

There is a statement there that 314.1C is an extremely rare mutation, which occurs in only about 1 in 290,000 cases worldwide according to the EMPOP database. But the standard description of this mutation is not 314.1C, but 315.1C, and according to the EMPOP database it is not rare - it is found in more than 99% of the population.

So there is an error of some kind in what Dr Louhelainen is quoted as saying. Where exactly the error lies, and what the corrected form of the statement would be, is impossible to know without more information.

[Robert]

Hi Tracy

I'll suggest that to Young Mr Grace.

Regards

Mr Rumbold