Author Topic: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4  (Read 51667 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BobAtchison

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 896
    • View Profile
    • The Alexander Palace
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #240 on: October 14, 2007, 11:37:49 AM »
Richard:

As I posted in the Q and A thread I am asking if you question the recent discoveries in Yekaterinburg.  If you do can you say so clearly and what is the basis for your opinions?

Bob

Offline Richard_Schweitzer

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #241 on: October 14, 2007, 11:52:32 AM »
Bob,

I Answered what you asked in that post over in that thread. Now, you ask me something additional here about that, which I shall answer there.

Offline Richard_Schweitzer

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #242 on: October 14, 2007, 11:56:44 AM »
Bob,

I ask again, is that your judgement of me?

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #243 on: October 14, 2007, 01:01:12 PM »
Mr. Schweitzer, you continue to obfuscate.

He can't help it, he is an attorney ;-).
« Last Edit: October 14, 2007, 01:09:03 PM by Helen_A »

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
« Last Edit: October 14, 2007, 01:08:33 PM by Helen_A »

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #245 on: October 14, 2007, 01:05:50 PM »
Mr Schweitzer, can't you just answer the question with a "yes" or a "no", do you believe that Anderson's tissue sample that Dr Gill tested was somehow substitued for someone else's? Jus yes or no please. We can just take it from there.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2007, 01:07:34 PM by Helen_A »

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #246 on: October 14, 2007, 01:10:15 PM »
Helen,

I think Mr Slippery has already answered that question, by saying that yes he believes the sample tested by Gill "belonged to someone other than Anna Manahan". 


Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #247 on: October 14, 2007, 01:12:25 PM »
Helen,

I think Mr Slippery has already answered that question, by saying that yes he believes the sample tested by Gill "belonged to someone other than Anna Manahan". 

Oh, he did? Sometimes it's hard to tell what he is saying exactly... Not a bad tactic to answer a question with another question, Mr Schweitzer, but really, a bit transparent...

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #248 on: October 14, 2007, 01:16:16 PM »
Here is what he said Helen:


If my answer about the tissue source was not definite enough, I will say that yes it think the tissue tested did not come from the body of Anasatasia Manahan, as the name entered on the histology records of MJH; but, further, that if it did come from that person's body, it was otherwise compromised.

The principal weight for my conclusions, not as advocacy for anyone else's thinking, is not that the mtDNA profile from that tissue did not match the profile from Prince Phillip, but that it was matched to that of Maucher. Whereas, the weight of so much other evidence is against the conclusion that Anastasia Manahan had the physical characteristics, origins and background of  FS. That does not gainsay the statistical probability established by the mtDNA science applied. It simply questions that to which the science was applied.

Offline Richard_Schweitzer

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #249 on: October 14, 2007, 01:17:59 PM »
Rob,

As to your #141:

The ad hominem doesn't bother me.  In responding, not oferring any arguments as advoccay, I explained what motivates my continuing investigations.

Bob has asked me straight questions. I tried to give straight answers.

I don't always get back straight answers to my questions.

So, to sort things out, if you think I have left something "hanging," lay it out as a straight question and I will answer.

As an aside: There is nothing wrong with First Year Law School, I passed and was admitted to the Virginia Bar by the end of my second year, and U.Va. did not concentrate on Virginia Law. I will twit you, and ask that you say from what other point in my over 55 years at  the Bar (and not just in one jurisdiction) I should frame responses?

Offline Richard_Schweitzer

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 161
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #250 on: October 14, 2007, 01:23:52 PM »
# 152 make a good point:

Look up the meaning of Attorn.  Not Attorney, who is someone who attorns.

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #251 on: October 14, 2007, 01:29:48 PM »
# 152 make a good point:

Look up the meaning of Attorn.  Not Attorney, who is someone who attorns.

What??

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #252 on: October 14, 2007, 01:32:38 PM »
Here is what he said Helen:

If my answer about the tissue source was not definite enough, I will say that yes it think the tissue tested did not come from the body of Anasatasia Manahan, as the name entered on the histology records of MJH; but, further, that if it did come from that person's body, it was otherwise compromised.

The principal weight for my conclusions, not as advocacy for anyone else's thinking, is not that the mtDNA profile from that tissue did not match the profile from Prince Phillip, but that it was matched to that of Maucher. Whereas, the weight of so much other evidence is against the conclusion that Anastasia Manahan had the physical characteristics, origins and background of  FS. That does not gainsay the statistical probability established by the mtDNA science applied. It simply questions that to which the science was applied.

Mr Schweitzer, whose intestine do you think it was?

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #253 on: October 14, 2007, 01:36:50 PM »
Here is as possibly plain as I can make it, so lets see how plain of an answer I will get:



If my answer about the tissue source was not definite enough, I will say that yes it think the tissue tested did not come from the body of Anasatasia Manahan, as the name entered on the histology records of MJH; but, further, that if it did come from that person's body, it was otherwise compromised.

The principal weight for my conclusions, not as advocacy for anyone else's thinking, is not that the mtDNA profile from that tissue did not match the profile from Prince Phillip, but that it was matched to that of Maucher. Whereas, the weight of so much other evidence is against the conclusion that Anastasia Manahan had the physical characteristics, origins and background of  FS. That does not gainsay the statistical probability established by the mtDNA science applied. It simply questions that to which the science was applied.

Very well. Since you say that 1. you think the tissue tested did not come from the body of Anastasia Manahan.
Who's body could it have come from?
If it was not Anastasia Manahan's, then there are very few alternatives.
a.It was mis-labelled at MJH.  Do you believe this is the case? yes or no.
b.It was deliberately switched. Do you believe this is the case? yes or no.

2. "that if it did come from that person's body, it was otherwise compromised." Please elaborate with specificity exactly how, when and where and by whom it was so compromised.

3. "The principal weight for my conclusions, not as advocacy for anyone else's thinking, is not that the mtDNA profile from that tissue did not match the profile from Prince Phillip, but that it was matched to that of Maucher."  As demonstrated, it was a virtual impossibility that the Anastasia Manahan sample DNA sequence was unknown prior to PCR.  It was sequenced first. The Maucher DNA sequence was thus also unknown at the time the AM sample was sequenced and was still unknown until the Maucher DNA was subject to PCR.

Please explain HOW a match to the Maucher DNA would occur, that was NOT an exact match, (ie: indicia of a switch of the DNA) but rather with ONE haplytype mis-match, which is in fact the exact thing one would occur in a familial relationship that was not maternal?

I am NOT asking for hypotheticals of any kind. I am asking you to make specific answers to support the statements you have made.  IS THIS CLEAR ENOUGH?

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Re: Anna Anderson - Physical Evidence and DNA #4
« Reply #254 on: October 14, 2007, 01:45:19 PM »
# 152 make a good point:

Look up the meaning of Attorn.  Not Attorney, who is someone who attorns.

What??

Not sure either Helen, makes less sense when you look it up:

Blacks Law Dictionary:
Attorn:  To turn over; to transfer to another money or goods; to assign to some particular use or service.  To consent to the transfer of a rent or reversion.  To agree to become tenant to one as owner or landlord of an estate previously held of another, or to agree to recognise a new owner of a property or estate and promise payment of rent to him.

HUH??