Friday, October 2, 2026

Typical DJT supporter to the rescue!

at

Thursday, October 1, 2026

Video: Dr. Mark Holowchak on the problems with History by a Hair's salacious attack on Thomas Jefferson:

1) DNA Degradation & Hair Sample Limitations.

2) Chain of Custody & Provenance Integrity.

3) Unverifiable Artifact Origins & Environmental Contamination...

Article: Richard Kurin’s Book, History by a Hair: A Hairy (Hirsute) or Hairless (Glabrous) Analysis? by Dr. Mark Holowchak



Richard Kurin’s Book, History by a Hair: A Hairy (Hirsute) or Hairless (Glabrous) Analysis?

Dr. Mark Holowchak

Finally, it is out! The much-ballyhooed book History by a Hair! The book is motivated by a 15-year DNA study by Richard Green, Samuel Vohr, and 12 others, including the Smithsonian’s own Richard Kurin, who prompted the study, who wrote the book.

The book, published by Crown, has the following write-up:

The definitive account of how a discarded strand of hair found in Thomas Jefferson’s Bible led to a sweeping, multi-year genomic investigation, drawing on technological advances in DNA to finally resolve [sic; to resolve finally!] a 200-year national controversy….

In 2011, staff at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History discovered what appeared to be a hair—light red, possibly human—pressed between the pages of the Thomas Jefferson Bible. That hair sparked an unprecedented scientific quest: determining if modern genomics could recover Jefferson’s DNA and finally resolve the most divisive and enduring question surrounding his life—the paternity of the children of Sally Hemings, one of hundreds of African Americans enslaved by Thomas Jefferson.

For over two centuries, the Jefferson-Hemings controversy has shaped American debates about race, power, slavery, and the mythology of the Founding Fathers. Historians have argued fiercely. Descendants have lived with uncertainty. DNA technology in the 1990s brought us closer, but not all the way; the evidence remained incomplete. Until now. In this riveting narrative—part scientific detective story, part historical epic—Richard Kurin, distinguished scholar and

museum official, leads readers through the fifteen-year-long genomic investigation conducted with leading DNA scientists, archaeologists, genealogists, forensic experts, and Jefferson and Hemings’ descendants across the country.

The result is the first conclusive, scientifically validated answer to a question that has reverberated since the eighteenth century—an answer that settles the historical record, deepens our understanding of Jefferson, honors generations of family oral history, and asks America to confront the full complexity of its origins.

Huzzah! Kurin has finally solved the puzzle of Jefferson’s involvement with Sally Hemings. Jefferson is the father. We now have proof! And the press cannot get enough!

Andrew Lawler of The Atlantic writes:

The scientists had found their proof, thanks to Jefferson’s hair: “Once you have a common ancestor, … the accuracy is absolutely stunning.”

Emily Blumenthal of The Telegraph penned her essay, “Hair Test Proves Thomas Jefferson Fathered Children with Slave, Book Claims.”

Jill Jordan of Atlanta Black Star crafted an article titled “‘A 99.9% Chance’” Smithsonian Scientists Say New DNA Analysis of Thomas Jefferson’s Hair Show He Fathered Sally Heming’s Enslaved Children.”

The author of the book, Kurin, writes of his motivation for the project:

If we can get Jefferson’s DNA, we can solve a 200-year-old mystery of American history. … How can a man who writes, “All men are created equal,” have his own children, not equal, and not having freedom? I knew people had a great stake in it.

Well, at least we know his disposition as he began his project….

Before commenting on the book, let me begin metaphorically, as readers by now know of my profound love for metaphors in sound historical research. I do not have a horse in this race! Jefferson’s paternity of Hemings’ children has become a political hot potato. Blacks and extreme Leftists are nearly of one voice that Jefferson fathered all of Hemings’ children; extreme Rightists are intent on defending Jefferson come what may. I am interested not in political extremism—that is why this country is in the state it now is!—but in what the facts tell us.

I have maintained, and I continue to maintain, that Jefferson had no interest in and no involvement with Hemings. My reasons are many, and well-known by now. If something emerges to show that I am very likely wrong, I shall have, without reservations, a change of mind, though there will be proportionate diminution for my respect for Jefferson. If it should turn out that he had a lengthy affair with Hemings, which was continued after Callendar’s accusations in 1802, he would have been placing his libido before his concern for his children’s and grandchildren’s wellbeing. That would be too unlike Thomas Jefferson, and so I too consider his “liaison” with Hemings to be, as a granddaughter once said, a “moral impossibility.”

The Study:

The study was conducted over the course of 15 years. The cost must have been prodigious, but Smithsonian has the wherewithal.

The researchers studied genetic matter from 13 fifth-generation descendants of Hemings and Jefferson

Madison and Eston: 9 descendants

Maria Jefferson: 2 descendants

Randolph Jefferson: 2 descendants

Note here that there is no genetic material from Thomas Jefferson other than the sample of hairs, presumed to be of him. Note also that there was need of innovation to capture the genome: a certain amount of “reasonable” reconstruction.

Let us now turn to generation 5. Each generation shares some 50 percent of its matter with the prior generation. Thus:

G1: 0.5 or 1/2

G2: 0.25 or 1/4

G3: 0.125 or 1/8

G4: 0.0625 or 1/16

G5: 0.03125 or 1/32

Hence, someone being a descendant of Jefferson in generation 5 will roughly have 0.031 (3.1 percent) of Jefferson’s DNA, with some allowance for random variations.

Having run over 20,000 simulations of paternity, Green et al. concluded that the probability of Jefferson being the father of Madison and Eston was greater than 0.999 (99.95%). In other words, there is less than one chance in 1000 of Jefferson’s non-involvement with Hemings apropos of Madison and Eston Hemings. That conclusion is incredible! Rarely does such a thing happen in science! That beats Fraser Neiman’s conclusion, using his Bayes’ algorithm, that there is a probability of 0.99 or one chance in 100 that Jefferson father all of Hemings’ children. Though Kurin limits his conclusion to Madison and Eston (he certainly knows that no one will hesitate in broadening the scope without evidence to the other children of Hemings), Neiman’s conclusion pertained to all of Hemings’ children. Hmm, Neiman’s

claim was itself sufficient to settle the debate, but somehow it has not!

Results show (from what I gather):

Madison and Eston (9): 0.5 to 5.1 percent, with one sample of 5.1 percent (0.0051 to 0.051)

Maria (2): 2.4 and 2.7 percent

Randolph (2): nothing unexpected

The one sample with 5.1 percent of Jefferson’s DNA seems compelling, for it is higher than expectancy. It is closer to generation 4 than generation 5. Recall that a fifth-generation descendant of Jefferson should roughly have 3.1 percent of his DNA. Green takes it as confirmation, but that very high percentage, not out of the range of chance or perhaps due to some methodological error (for it is in only one sample), is perhaps indicative of some “contamination” of data by an unknown source (e.g., admixture of blood-lines between the Carrs, Jeffersons, and Randolphs?): That anomaly needs to be investigated and explained, not taken as confirmation.

While researchers claim to have recovered Thomas Jefferson’s genome (with the hair sample preserved presumably after Jefferson’s death, not from his “Bible”), though they admit to some ingenuity for some “reconstructing” was needed, there has been no genome from Randolph Jefferson. The genetic similarity of Jefferson and a brother should be 50 percent (0.5). That would have been aidful.

Analysis, Biological and Non-Biological:

The promo for the book asserts Kurin’s book gives an “answer that settles the historical record, deepens our understanding of Jefferson, honors generations of family oral history, and asks America to confront the full complexity of its origins.”

“Complexity,” always complexity. Pro-paternity adherents love to fall back on Jefferson’s complexity, as he was a walking, talking “contradiction”—a term misused and misunderstood. Sentences, not people, are contradictions. Yet Kurin vaunts: “I was using evidence, logic, and the available tools and methods to follow a trail.”

Nonetheless, to bastardize Shakespeare, “Methinks the author doth boast too much.”

The authors end their study (my italics):

The data and analysis presented here help [to] address a controversy that has existed for more than 200 years and often divided descendants, scholars, institutions, and the American people. Having recovered Thomas Jefferson’s DNA, the genomic evidence further reinforces strong historical scholarship indicative of Thomas Jefferson’s paternity of Sally Hemings[’] children. The study thus advances methods of genomic science and provides greater certainty about early U.S. history. It also has personal and familial consequences for all the progeny of Thomas Jefferson—for those whose descent has historically been accepted, affirmed, or denied. Indeed, while results of this study were being shared among participants and their families, the Monticello Association formed a reconciliation committee engaging the children of several of the descendants. The findings may enable descendants of “founding father” Thomas Jefferson, whether born to Martha Wayles Jefferson or to Sally Hemings, and whether their ancestral legacy is one of slavery or freedom, to consider themselves as part of one and the same, complicated, American family.

The wording is unduly cautious. They have, in their own words, given us a plus-99.9 percent probability that Jefferson fathered Madison and Eston. In science, that is tantamount to

declaring it factual that Jefferson fathered the two. So, why such guarded language? That is a large, bright red flag!

One Himalayan albatross is that the study has heretofore not been vetted by professional biologists and published in a reputable journal. It is still supposedly under review at Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) but it has not been yet accepted by the journal. Why was Kurin antsy about publishing the book quickly, prior to vetting his data? Does he fear that the study has serious flaws? That seems almost certain, as his assessment of 99.9 percent certitude apropos of Jefferson’s paternity seems ungrounded in his data.

Another issue which piggybacks on the first is that Mary Brady-Atkins, 98 years young, withdrew her DNA sample on August 11, 2026. She objected to the book being published prior to the data being vetted. She also had reservations about any genealogical link between Jefferson and Hemings.

A third, on assumption of the sample of hair being Jefferson’s, concerns the problem of gleaning reliable nuclear DNA from hair, 200 years old. There is typically considerable degradation and the possibility of contamination over such a span, hence Green et al. engaged in some reasonable reconstruction for their purposes.

There will be, I presume, other problems with this study disclosed by those much more knowledgeable about such biological concerns than am I. John Works, for instance, has been engaged in a many-years-long project of study of DNA samples pertaining to Jefferson and Hemings and has noted possible issues with Kurin’s study. I include a summary of his findings below. The paper behind the book too will certainly attract the attention of geneticists across America, and even across the globe, as did Eugene Foster’s study in Nature in 1988. Foster’s study, “Jefferson Fathered Slave’s Last Child,” was roundly assaulted by experts after his publication.

Nonetheless, even if my cautionary remarks about problems with this study are correct, with the publication of Kurin’s book prior to any professional, biological assessment of his data in the study, there will be—like there was with the fantastical story in the book on the 1619 thesis; with the flawed 1998 DNA study by Eugene Foster concerning Jefferson’s paternity; with the movie on Jefferson in Paris; with Monticello’s own 2000 study of the data; with Monticello’s claim in 2018, under Leslie Greene-Bowman, that it is henceforth to be taken as fact that Jefferson fathered all of Hemings’ children; and with the novels related to Jefferson and Sally Hemings—considerable damage to Jefferson’s reputation. Is that a Marxist conspiracy or do so many “scholars” merely enjoy trying to undermine the legacy of one of America’s truly great persons? Independently of any data put forth, Kurin’s book will have wide readership on account of its large-scale promotion thus far and account of its appeal to sensationalism.

I iterate: That the book is coming out before any professional assessment of his biological data is telling. Once the book is published—and it was supposedly released on September 22—the damage will have been done. The general public will care little about any condemnation of the professionalism of the study—procedural flaws, contaminated data, or misinterpretation of days.

Recall that Eugene Foster recanted concerning his 1998 DNA study, which almost all historians embraced as gospel and which overnight changed the historical landscape apropos of Jefferson Hemings. Foster’s study was titled “Jefferson Fathered Slave’s Last Child.” Historians uncritically ate up the study, without understanding its implications. Foster later stated: “This whole affair has been conducted by amateurs. I include myself.” Why is that recantation not published on Monticello’s webpage???

The unpublished DNA study, I include here.

John Works’ careful assessment of the study I include here.


at

Correctamundo!

at

πŸ€”πŸ€”

at

Wednesday, September 30, 2026

Stop idolizing Eurotrash...

at

One of the true comedic legends— not outdated to us & never canceled!

at

Tuesday, September 29, 2026

Applying reason to the disgraceful woke crusade against Thomas Jefferson!

(As already stated: We trust the Left with paternity results like we do election results! πŸ˜‚)

 
at

πŸ˜‚πŸ€£πŸ˜…

at

We need to have a Committee of Vigilance!

at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)