Author Topic: New study questions identity of Romanov bones  (Read 95787 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

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: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #435 on: October 26, 2004, 07:08:26 AM »
DaveK,

Thank you for that very interesting post and evaluation!

Helen

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: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #436 on: October 26, 2004, 07:34:23 AM »
Dave,

Besides, he used wrong nomenclature 16327C/16357T under the word "haplotype", which gives you a wrong impression that there are 2 SNPs (mutation) in the finger sample. It's like he used "04/12/03" to describe "March 12th, 2004").

Do you think this was deliberate or due to incompetency?

He must not draw the conclusion before he begun the experiment, even if he "knew" that “Gill's result was a hoax”. What if DNA from the finger matches to Tsarina's? You must analyze the whole HVI. No reviewers accept this biased methodology which skew any conclusion.

Of course he already drew the conclusions, that was obviously the whole of point of him doing this study. They were out to prove that these bones were not the bones, at any cost, and designed this whole study with that in mind! It was completely biased.

What is disingenuous is that he made it sound like it failed because 128bp was longer than 110bp. This is ridiculous. 1000bp failed because of its size, but 128bp and 110bp are practically the same size.

Many labs are successful with longer 200bp PCR from as old as 3000 years old sample. If they can't perform short 128bp PCR, it indicates that there is something wrong with his method or sample.

Knight used an odd table to dodge the question to this point,because either reason severly undermine his claim "long PCR product is impossible".


Seems like Dr Knight not only manipulated what historians and biographers were saying but also the science! But he did it in such subtle way, that it is not immediately obvious. Unbelievable.

i]I have to emphasize that even if Knight did 2nd PCR in a correct way, his claims cannot be substantiated by his data. Even if he is able to establish the difficulty of long PCR, he still doesn't provide alternative scenario to explain the match between Philip and Romanov DNA. What I wanted pointed out is that his claim is so wrong  in multi-layered way, both in logical and technical ways. [/i]

The question is, where were the peer reviewers? How did they let this pass? Isn't that the whole point of peer review? Oh yes, I forgot, they are the friends of the co-author....

Then he must want to show the whole sequence for the first time to leave his name in history!

Perhaps this is what this is all about for Dr Knight? He wasn't out to show facts, just to make a name for himself? I think this wil backfire instead....

There are significant difference between ancient DNA method and fresh DNA method. Knight doesn’t seem to know this. To my knowledge, none of Knight Group including both Stanford and Los Alamos has an experience in ancient DNA. They should have asked the lab who does it, but they didn’t.

Unfortunately, they simply applied a method for a fresh DNA, which results in a grossly un-optimized condition for ancient DNA.

5) Finally, the most bizzare part is that Knight didn't repeat P Gill's method, although the reproducing his PCR was the whole point of the study. His protocol was completely different from Gill’s.


Then how can he claim to have replicated Gill's study??

Seems like he makes so many unsubstantiated or downright wrong claims... even more than we first suspected. I just can't believe this guy is getting away with all this!

Helen

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by helenazar »

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: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #437 on: October 26, 2004, 10:50:04 AM »
Quote

 Sure, recent scholarship has uncovered much new information about N and A but the real value of Nicholas and Alexandra is that Massie was able to bring Nicholas and Alexandra to life for many readers thus making history interesting; something few authors or history professors can do.  



I think that this is what Massie meant when he said he didn't want to change anything about "N & A"...

I also like his "Peter the Great" very much, in fact I got my copy signed by him on Sunday  :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by helenazar »

Offline Candice

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 241
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #438 on: October 26, 2004, 05:04:38 PM »
DaveK, thank you very much for the information.

The finger that Knight claims Elizabeth wasn't that DNA compared with Alexandra's and wasn't that thought to have belonged to her friend Barbara?

Will they be performing a new DNA analysis on the body in Jerusalem?


Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #439 on: October 26, 2004, 09:10:50 PM »
Quote
Will they be performing a new DNA analysis on the body in Jerusalem?


We can be optimistic, but I believe we might be waiting for a while! ;)


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline Belochka

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4447
  • City of Peter stand in all your splendor - Pushkin
    • View Profile
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #440 on: October 26, 2004, 09:44:43 PM »
Quote
The question is, where were the peer reviewers? How did they let this pass? Isn't that the whole point of peer review? Oh yes, I forgot, they are the friends of the co-author....


Of course the joy of not having one's article peer reviewed is that it enables publication of results which otherwise would be subject to scrutiny. How very convenient for all concerned!  ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Belochka »


Faces of Russia is now on Facebook!


http://www.searchfoundationinc.org/

Offline Robert_Hall

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6648
  • a site.
    • View Profile
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #441 on: October 26, 2004, 09:59:18 PM »
I think Massie's FINAL CHAPTER could be safely considered an update of N&A.
And DaveK, thank you for putting the dna material so clearly, that those of us not even remotely cogent about such matters could understand. I appreciate that illustrative post immensely. I actually UNDERSTOOD what you were talking about !!
Cheers & CARRY ON !
Robert
Life may not be the party we expected, but while we are here, might as well dance..

Do you want the truth, or my side of the story ?- Hank Ketchum.

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: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #442 on: October 27, 2004, 08:39:51 AM »
Quote
Will they be performing a new DNA analysis on the body in Jerusalem?


Candice,

I woud even go as far as saying: Don't hold your breath  ;)

Helen

rskkiya

  • Guest
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #443 on: October 29, 2004, 12:34:47 PM »
Hello
Davek -Thanks again for all your clear and concise posts regarding all of this -- and I should like to apologize for some of JonC's less than charitable remarks.
Spasibah
Rskkiya

Offline JonC

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 202
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #444 on: October 30, 2004, 12:21:58 PM »
rskkiya you're my hero! ::)

rskkiya

  • Guest
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #445 on: October 30, 2004, 06:39:35 PM »
JonC

  In all honesty (and from examining previous posts) I would guess that you and I are most likely on opposite sides of the political/historical spectrum-- however, if we can all remain CIVIL here--there will be no need to spend time apologizing.

OK?

Rskkiya

PS :  I am curious to read the published "evidence" although I am rather dreading the actual outcome.
R.

Offline Robert_Hall

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6648
  • a site.
    • View Profile
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #446 on: October 30, 2004, 06:56:42 PM »
Same here. Has therte been any further word on WHEN the King report is due out?
Should be a lot of fun, to say the least.
Cheers,
Robert
Life may not be the party we expected, but while we are here, might as well dance..

Do you want the truth, or my side of the story ?- Hank Ketchum.

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: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #447 on: October 30, 2004, 07:01:04 PM »
Quote
...the King report is due out?
Robert


Robert,

I think you  mean the "Knight" report? Not a peep from him as far as I know... Perhaps another case of not holding our breaths?  ;)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by helenazar »

Offline Robert_Hall

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6648
  • a site.
    • View Profile
Re: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #448 on: October 30, 2004, 07:46:56 PM »
Yes, quite right. I was getting a post off to king & forgot to change names. Thanks,
Robert
Life may not be the party we expected, but while we are here, might as well dance..

Do you want the truth, or my side of the story ?- Hank Ketchum.

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: New study questions identity of Romanov bones
« Reply #449 on: March 13, 2005, 07:47:14 PM »
Hello everyone,

I am reviving this to let everyone who followed this thread know that I just posted an investigative article that I, and another forum member, Margarita Nelipa (aka "Belochka") collaborated on for the current issue of the Atlantis magazine.  We got Greg King's permission to post it here, to give anyone who does not subscribe to this magazine the opportunity to read the article. Thank you, Greg.

This article deals with the Stanford study which we "pick apart" and explain step by step, drawing our own conclusions. It also includes our interview with Drs Peter Gill and Erika Hagelberg, as well as a comment by the author Robert Massie, who was cited numerouos times in Alec Knight's paper.  

I've posted the article on the "DNA" thread, here is the link:

http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=anastasia;action=display;num=1108948411;start=200#205

Thanks everyone for your participation in this discussion which inspired this article!  :)

Helen and Margarita (Belochka)  :)  :)

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by helenazar »