Naughty Bad NADs Sneak Home Under Cover of Darkness

Welcome back to the soap opera!

5 bad nads

Those Bad NADs…they’ve done it AGAIN.  Yep, they’re back.  You remember…it was right after April’s Fool’s Day and Ancestry gifted me with two New Ancestor Discoveries that weren’t – Diedamia Lyon and John David Curnutte.  Then, a couple months later, ungrateful houseguests that they were, they disappeared one night, never to be seen again…well…until now.

But because Ancestry must have thought I was lonely, they assigned me three additional bad NADs to take their place.  Now, the good news was that while these three were indeed Bad NADS and not actual new ancestor discoveries – there was a silver lining to this cloud.  Even though these NADs aren’t my ancestors – at least I was able to document some ways to figure out why and how bad NADs are assigned – so hopefully you can work through your NADS too.

But apparently, John and Diedamia weren’t at all happy with the accommodations where they were residing after disappearing in June, so they snuck back sometime overnight.  Yep, they’re back.  I woke up, and there they were, staring at me, just like they had never been gone.  When I was a kid, on the farm, anything that showed up like this was always pregnant.  Diedamia, do you have something to tell me???

The guest room is getting quite full now…with 5 Bad NADs in residence – all impostors – claiming to be related to me.  Why, you’d think I had won the lottery or something…

I took a look, again, at Diedamia and John, utilizing the same tools that I used to determine that John Larimer and Jean Larimer weren’t my ancestors – nor was Robert Shiflet.  But given that I have only two actual DNA matches with descendants of Diedamia and John, and we don’t show any other common family links that I can discern – I was unable to figure out why I have a DNA link to two of John and Diedamia’s descendants.  Perhaps there is a common ancestor upstream someplace that will become evident one day.  Or, maybe it’s like Robert Shiflet and I’m descended through the wife’s siblings, or like the Larimers where my McKee matches also match the Larimer line.  One thing is for sure, Diedamia Lyons and John Curnutte are not my ancestors.  How I’m related to them, if I’m related to them, is yet to be determined.  Maybe that will be a future episode of the soap opera.  What shall we call this mini-series?  As the NADs Return???

It will be interesting to see how long John and Diedamia, and for that matter, my other bad NADs, hang around this time.  Seems like I have a bit of a NAD revolving door.  One thing is for sure….it’s interesting to see who is waiting for me every day.

So, let’s update the NAD Scoreboard:

  • Ancestry – 0
  • Bad NADs – 7

35 thoughts on “Naughty Bad NADs Sneak Home Under Cover of Darkness

  1. My worst Bad NAD is Milo Andrus…I hate seeing him peering out at me. I absolutely have no genetic connection to him. They also gave me 10 potential DNA Relatives and only one of them actually has a confirmed common ancestors with me. Most of the others are “linked” to me because we share surnames such as Johnson, Smith, and Miller – none of them are valid – very unscientific results.
    Jackie Reiss

      • Roberta,

        I have been reading your articles for sometime. Recently I found Carl Vannoy 15 shared segments and Dean Vannoy filter matches in my Chromasome browser. One of my fathers sisters Mildred Crain married a Venable. I have seen both names in your posts. My aunt Mildred Crain Venable and her child died.
        I hope not to be a GO NAD rather some connection that is relative. :). I do read your articles and follow your posts. I enjoy reading very much.
        I am not informed enough to know much about all of this.

        Carolyn Crain Stewart
        Dustnsew@aol.com

      • Roberta, you said:

        “It would be nice to be able to dismiss a NAD you know is incorrect. We could call that the GO NAD feature. Sorry, I couldn’t help myself…”

        I got to thinking, since you just profiled Bryan Cranston…

        How about… BREAKING NAD

        Sorry, but I couldn’t help myself either! 😉

  2. I am a descendant of the Lyon family of colonial Amherst and Culpeper Counties of Virginia. I have been following your blog for two years and have noticed that you have many of the same ancestral families as me and my husband, including Estes on my husband’s line and Harrell on my line. Both of our families came to America in the early 1600’s, to Jamestown and Salem. Our DNA test results are posted on myFTDNA, gedmatch and DNAged. My son’s is posted on Ancestry. I have noticed your email as the contact, on some of my matches, on gedmatch. Hope this helps solve the mystery.

      • My son matched Harrell on his DNA test, so we assumed that my husband, Jim Harl, was the connection. However, his DNA did not match, on the Harrell project. There is also the assumption that the Harl(e) surname used to be Harrold. There were Harle, Harrell and Harrold families living in Kentucky in the early 1700’s. Many trees, on Ancestry.com, have these three names as being the same family. This could be causing the incorrect circles.

        Your tests match my mother’s sister, test F405904. They descend from the Campbell and Alexander families of ancient Scotland. I enjoyed your blog on Scotland, last year.

  3. I monitor three trees. My husbands tree, my son-in-law’s tree and my tree. The only tree that receives these NADS is my son in law’s tree and I wonder if that is because his results are the only results that I do not have linked up to a tree. Do you know if this might be the case?
    Additionally, as your NADS are growing my beta circles are growing. The rub here for me is that I am not interested in this side of my tree and all 19 of them are useless to me. However, I would dearly love them to begin a beta circle with two other people I have found in my tree but I don’t believe I have any control over who they select. Now, it would be great if Ancestry would allow me to begin my own beta circle or even allow me to suggest one but Ancestry is not very user friendly and this is why any further DNA referrals will be made to FTDNA. At least or until Ancestry comes up with a chromosome browser.

    • That’s not supposed to happen – and that is purpose of NADs. Circles are supposed to be for people who both have a DNA and a tree match for an ancestor. If it actually a Circle your son is in and it’s not a NAD – then you need to report this to Ancestry as a bug.

  4. I think I have a couple of bad NADs too. I found them in other peoples trees that are related to me through an ancestor a few generations before them.
    Since I am in the Hiram Estes circle, shouldn’t you and I be distant relatives? I don’t see you in my 300 plus matches. My username on there is Sandycheeks3

  5. I think I may have figured out why we have bad NADs and inaccurate DNA Circles. Remember when the genetic genealogy community finally convinced Ancestry to convert from base pairs (Mbs) to cMs? Ancestry said they would only convert the customer data going forward, and leave the existing 40,000 or so old customers still with the less accurate base pair technology. So poor now Ancestry is trying to compare apples and kumquats – that’s why they won’t provide a chromosome browser and why the NADs are based on less than stellar family trees not overlapping strings on a particular chromosome.

    Just a thought

  6. Is it possible that these bad Nads are appearing because someone has them in their tree along with the legitimate relatives and that the real fault might be poorly researched trees, just a thought.

  7. Wish Ancestry would include a delete button on bad NADs. I am tired of looking at scary old pic of woman who doesn’t belong.

  8. I have theory to my bad NAD. It is with a James Adams “Caudill” b. 1798 d. 1873. On my mother’s tree, I have a John Clinton “Adams” b. 1886 d. 1977. I honestly believe, that Ancestry got the two names mixed up and decided that I must be related to “John Adams” Caudill. Has this happened to anybody else with theirs?

  9. Yes I have some NADs. One is a distant cousins husband. I was thinking to myself, what in the world does he have to do with me? I also have two others that are married to each other. They have drove me crazy looking for a connection. So I do understand what you are talking about. If they found these people, why can’t they just tell you who they are?

  10. I’m afraid that those most of us who have worked hard on our family history are not likely ever to benefit from NADs. We’ve already plucked the low hanging fruit and much more. Real discoveries in genetic genealogy require careful study of DNA match results and triangulation. Ancestry’s NADs are an ill-conceived substitute for legitimate research.

  11. I also have 4 NADs. I called Ancestry on this huge error. They want to hear from everyone who is experiencing it. They also have asked my to share the page my NADs appear on. Which I will do when they appear again. I’m sure they will…..in and out every few weeks.

  12. Pingback: Elizabeth “Probably Not Webb” Estes (1715/1720-1772/1782 ), Wife of Moses, 52 Ancestors #86 | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

  13. I took three dna test one with ancestry two with family tree. I also have nads. I could not figure it out. until I took my y dna test. my brother also took one. the nads from ancestry were on my dna test. I found out that I had a different father than my brother. the nads were my real father and family.

  14. Roberta, I know this probably isn’t the appropriate place to share this but I am so excited I just have to post it somewhere. Ancestry is now showing matches which are in common with a match. Just found this out tonight when I checked my matches for today. I’ve already made some exciting discoveries. I’ve tested with all three major companies and have always had some good matches on Ancestry but unless they respond and they have no family tree attached I haven’t been able to figure out where they match. Now I have a pretty good idea. No chromosome browser but this is still a great step forward.

  15. Pingback: Ancestry Shared Matches Combined With New Ancestor Discoveries | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

  16. Pingback: The Best and Worst of 2015 – Genetic Genealogy Year in Review | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

  17. Pingback: The Ancestry 200 | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

  18. Pingback: Trying to Make Ancestors Out of NADs | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s