John has lived in West Los Angeles, CA, Raleigh, NC, Boulder, CO, Brookfield Center, CT, and since 1982 has lived in Austin, TX. All of these moves were made while John worked for IBM. John joined IBM in 1967 and retired from IBM in 1997.
John is a direct patrilineal 8th great grandson of Henry Kingman the first Kingman to emigrate from England to America in 1634-5. Note that Henry was just one of John's 512 possible 8th great grandfathers, but John's surname and Y-DNA came only from him.
Paternal relationship is confirmed through Y-chromosome DNA testing. Peter Kingman and John Kingman match on 37 out of 37 markers (see YSearch IDs D8NMD and KFTAS) thereby confirming their direct paternal lines back to their MRCAHenry Kingman (born 1701). John and Peter are 6th cousins.
Y-chromosome DNA testing confirms that Gerald Kingman and John Kingman most likely share a direct patrilineal ancestor in a genealogical time frame. Their results match on 33 out of 37 markers (see YSearch IDs YUH8Z and KFTAS). No MRCA has yet been determined as John's ancestral line terminates with Henry Kingman who emigrated from England to America in 1634 and is thought to be of Frome, Somerset, England, and the Gerald's terminates with George Kingman and probably extends to John Kingman born c1640 in Frome, Somerset, England.
A maternal DNA relationship is pending confirmation between John Kingman and his fourth cousin once removed Denny Brooks who have a 57 cM match on Family FInder with a longest block of 14. Another cousin with matching DNA who is descended from Joseph Brooks or his ancestor is needed to provide confirmation via DNA triangulation.
For an idea of how much each of your ancestors contributed to your genetic makeup (excluding your X and Y chromosomes), consider that you have 30,000 genes. Your mother and father each contributed 50% of their genes (15,000) to you. Since the number of ancestors you have doubles each generation you go back, you could have 2,048 different ninth great-grandparents. If so, the genes you have in common with of each of them would be less than 0.05% of your genetic makeup (about 15 genes out of 30,000) Of course this is a mathematical take and does not account for cousins marrying cousins, etc.
It may seem morbid, but in the event of my demise I want to be sure that none of my hard work on WikiTree ends up being deleted. While I fully intend on being around to manage all my profiles for a very long time, in the event of my incapacitation or death I hereby give permission for the management of all of my private profiles to be transferred to the following WikiTreers, whether or not they are currently on my Trusted Lists.
John Kingman's DNA has been tested for genealogical purposes. It may be possible to confirm family relationships by comparing test results with John or other carriers of his ancestors' Y-chromosome or mitochondrial DNA.
Y-chromosome DNA test-takers in his direct paternal line on WikiTree:
Family Tree DNA Y-DNA Test 37 markers, haplogroup R-BY1823, Ysearch KFTAS, FTDNA kit #N145956 +
Y-Chromosome Test 15000 markers, haplogroup R-CTS12058, Ysearch KFTAS
Peter Kingman :
Y-Chromosome Test 37 markers, haplogroup R-P312, Ysearch D8NMD
Mitochondrial DNA test-takers in the direct maternal line:
Family Tree DNA mtDNA Test HVR1 and HVR2, haplogroup J1c5, Mitosearch KTFAS, FTDNA kit #N145956
It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share DNA with John:
Hi John, I just wanted to say "Congratulations" on becoming one of the newest Red Badged "Generous Genealogist"! Your patience and expertise was so appreciated especially working with fixing profile entries dealing with DNA results. We need more WikiTreers like yourself especially as Data Doctors!! Keep up the good work.
Replying to your question on John Berry's page (Berry-2713), the explanation of the indirect evidence is contained in Note NI4107 on this page, https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Berry-2713, extracted from S102.
Pettus-320 Walker Pettus, is a DNA y intercept from William Walker Pettus IV with me. We intercept above Pettus-320, according to the book he wrote on the Pettus lines. Again...I'm not sure what to do here, after about 8 generations, Y is the only good beyond, provided there is sourcing....
Pettus-316 (DNA confirmation). I'm not sure what you mean about errors. my family group has autosomal hits at Pettus-60 with other intercepts. In addition, my Y, according to William Pettus IV's book, intercepts others above Pettus 316......so not sure what to do.
John, I found two living, historically proven descendants of James Fleming 1760 through two different sons. I descend through a third. all three of our yDNA match. That is the strongest evidence one can find.
Third time is a charm! I did see the example was based on a third cousin relationship but did not take that to mean that the same process was not applicable to a triangulated relationship. And I had read the instructions on triangulation carefully (I believed) several times in the past but somehow did not catch the parenthetical. Thank you for pointing it out. I also changed the privacy settings on the other two to show their trees and Relationship Finder can now be used even in public mode. Finally, this conversation helped me identify that one of the three was traced back slightly incorrectly.
Thank you again for your patience and your help in improving the confirmation. I will check my others (they are all via triangulation) to correct this potential error.
In your follow up to Gentry-327 on my profile page, you state: "If the parents are the common ancestral couple, neither can be confirmed. " But the WikiTree Confirmation Example (included in the link you provided on DNA Confirmation (at https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:DNA_Confirmation_Example) states the opposite. It says "In most cases cousins share two most-recent common ancestors: a father and mother in an ancestral couple. In these cases, the relationships to both parents can be marked as Confirmed with DNA. "
And, although I appreciate your formatting suggestions, I use the exact formatting provided in the DNA Confirmation link you provide. Not trying to be difficult, but it sounds like a difference in what your group is trying to do and the official WT guidance.
You posted on the public profile of Gentry-327 (David Gentry), that the profile was giving DB errors for DNA confirmation and that the relationship was not noted according to guidelines. However, the relationship is marked according to guidelines. The sources section notes the triangulation (which is used beyond third cousins -- in this case it is 4th cousins twice removed to 6th cousins). It appears to be marked correctly. Please provide further guidance if you think there is a technical issue.