I never cared for Warren but I have to hand it to her, she has proven it doesn't take much to keep conservatives entertained.
Immaterial to the point that Senator Elizabeth Warren claimed Native American ancestry which was scientifically proven to be negligible.
Warren never ever said to be any percentage.
The tert said between 6 & 10 generations ago.
She was right. She said she was told her grandmother was part NA.
When wll you trumpettes ever just admit your orange buddy was wring. He lied. He welshed on a bet like the dishonest cheat he has always been.
Negligible.
Certainly not sufficient to claim such heritage in-substance in order to obtain academic or professional preference, eh?
Doesn't matter what Cadet Bone Spurs has done with his feckless, corrupt, dishonorable actions.
We're not talking about him.
We're talking about YOUR girl.
The one who lied in saying that she was substantively Native American.
Hell, real American Indians have asked her to shut-the-phukk-up because she's harming their interests.
You know it's got to be pretty damned bad when even American Indians tell Democrats to shut up.
LYING **** ALERT
Another lying POS Trumpette now claims that Warren said her NA ancestry was substantial.
Prove it or STFU
The Cherokee Nation condemns the use of blood tests. The CN does not admit members based on blood tests.
.
A salient and related point here is a crucial single line in the report which notes:
"Because available samples do not provide complete coverage of all Native American groups, some segments with Native American ancestry may be missed."
--- Notably absent from the database were samples of North American indigenous genomes, which would have included Cherokee, Lenape, and hundreds of other subgroups. That means that that content
cannot be eliminated from the various genome content that could not be matched, or in other words the NA segment in the report is a
minimum --- it could be higher given the unknowns but it cannot be lower.
Just after that the report also notes, in response to the ideas of "minimal" NA content:
"To determine whether the Native American ancestry results in the sample were unusually high relative to other individuals of European ancestry, analysis was also performed on 185 individuals from two reference sets from the 1000 Genomes Project— Americans of predominantly European ancestry from Utah (n = 99 individuals) and British individuals of European ancestry from Great Britain (n = 86 individuals)."
--- and the subject (Warren) was found to have genome levels more than twelve times higher than the British reference group and more than ten times higher than the Utahan reference group. ("Results", section 4, p.2)
... Which, in turn, puts the entire mythology about "less NA than the general population" entirely in the crapper. No subject can have "less" of something in the general population when she's already got more than TEN TIMES the incidence of a sample of that population, which itself tends to already rate slightly higher. There's no way to myth-math that.