|
Post by southern on Dec 21, 2009 18:39:08 GMT -5
You"re right Don, let us pros do the work.
|
|
|
Post by southern on Dec 21, 2009 18:40:06 GMT -5
Oh and Jax, how bad of a snow storm did you get with the EAST coast under feet of snow?
|
|
|
Post by thistlesdale on Dec 21, 2009 18:40:46 GMT -5
Is this the guy they used to gin the breed up? now that you mention it, he does look kinda familiar...
|
|
|
Post by hicntry on Dec 21, 2009 19:00:58 GMT -5
I believe the airedale genome has been mapped. The company that did it has access but you can probably bet no one can afford it at this time. The important thing is, where all these labs bouviers and schnauzers that were bred in for the black. If they can identifie the dale and bulldog...you know they can identify these other breeds that should be in that blank 25% space. It was a given that if the test didn't say what some wanted, then the test would be deemed invalid...but it is there in front of everyone like it or not. Don't see all those labs and other breeds anywhere on that paper. And yes, people are predictable. Let's look at it from another perspective. If that paper said lab or whatever in that blank 25% spot, those betting they were pure would just have to eat crow....and would. To bad it doesn't work both ways. Right now, Southern has won this round....it is up to the naysays to prove different if they don't like the results. the way I see it. Let's approach this rationally. Shall we start a thread on genetics having to do with color? Airedale folks have never had to deal with it but it is a field in itself. Let's all go search the net and see what we can find out consider there were black dogs in the foundation stock. I an not being a smart ass here, I don't know any more than the rest of you about color genetics. Never had a reason to glance at it and know I was glad I didn't have to deal with it with airedales. But knowing what little I know, it just seems plausable that it may be possible if there were black dogs in the foundation dogs. I may be wrong but, weren't the black otterhounds? bulldogs? are there black bulldogs? There is a start. Now it's up to the opposing side to prove it isn't possible at this point. Doesn't that seem fair? ;D
|
|
|
Post by hicntry on Dec 21, 2009 19:25:10 GMT -5
Interesting bull dog history. Bull terrier from the 1880's when the Airedale according to Hochwalt was failing badly in "the pits". Is this the guy they used to gin the breed up? By golly Ed, You may have just solved the mystery. Put a little hair on that head and what do you suppose that dog would look like? And yes, that body and chest are pretty familiar in other circles of airedales.
|
|
|
Post by Undercover Cowboy on Dec 21, 2009 19:26:00 GMT -5
[/i] Minor Breed - At least 12.5% of your dog’s DNA comes from this breed, so it is unlikely that this breed’s physical traits are visually represented unless some of the genes are dominant. Learn more about the breeds detected in Apache on the following pages...[/quote]
I would interpret this as meaning that 50% is Airedale and 37.5% is something else that they can not identify and 12.5 % is bulldog. And that 12.5% can't come out of the half that is Airedale...
|
|
|
Post by southern on Dec 21, 2009 19:45:28 GMT -5
I would interpret this as meaning that 50% is Airedale and 37.5% is something else that they can not identify and 12.5 % is bulldog. And that 12.5% can't come out of the half that is Airedale...
When you get your PHD in genitics, you can make the claims that you are, and it will hold water, but I guess working for a gas company means you did not go to school for this type of scientific Training, kinda leaves you in the dark. Have a Nice day today at
1:08pm, Undercover Cowboy wrote:LOL... At least 50% Airedale and 12.5% Bulldog I'm glad my money didn't go towards this...
It says right on the report "Mixed Breed" with Airedale being 50%.. I would say that the bulldog part being 12.5% is not part of the 50% Airedale..? but 12.5 % of what ever mongrel jumped over the fence?
Am I wrong??
Yes you're wrong. >50% Airedale does not mean =50% Airedale. >50% Airedale could however mean 100% Airedale. The 12.5% bulldog could result from common markers the breeds share. In my opinion the only way to discredit Southern is to sample a large group of AKC registered Airedales and have none of them come out with same results. Frank
|
|
|
Post by Wolfer on Dec 21, 2009 19:46:14 GMT -5
You"re right Don, let us pros do the work. Now this is funny. Pros!!!! maybe Don but id hardly claim you as a pro. well least Don gets out and works his dogs when he gets the chance and has the referenses and intellegence to ANSWER the hard questons. SO your equating yourself to Don. wow thats ugly I think it take more than turning out puppies to become a pro even if ya do have the "DNA PROOF" of the great black airedales.
|
|
|
Post by doylecpd on Dec 21, 2009 19:52:49 GMT -5
Cowboy,
Those notes, and the categories are GENERIC!!!
That means they show up on every report, not just those two. Its possible on a mutt to have 3 Intermediate breeds a 3 Minors, or whatever combo, but no Significant.
In the significant it is AT LEAST 50%
Minor is AT LEAST 12.5% but no more than 25%.
Intermediate is 25% but no more than 50%.
The total is 100%.
Simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by jespinoza on Dec 21, 2009 19:57:01 GMT -5
Oh and John, the article says that Coady was acting at the behest of the AKC, not the Airedale Terrier. The AKC (and I think the Kipps) were being sued as codefendents for 30 million dollars, according to southern . I think Coady is still active in the breed but I don't know that, he did have many, many years experience with Airedales and made a handsome living as a handler. I'm just trying to keep it in perspective.
Ok jax point taken. But now it seems that you are telling me that he was appointed to do same(LIE) or (paid) to do it on behalf of the AKC because he was "a very well respected professional". Is that the perspective that you were pointing out.
John
|
|
|
Post by thistlesdale on Dec 21, 2009 20:08:11 GMT -5
It was a given that if the test didn't say what some wanted, then the test would be deemed invalid just like in a court of law DNA evidence -never- proves anyone's innocence the state simply dismisses negative results as "inconclusive" Southern was put on trial here, and now her accusers want to dismiss the evidence because it works in her favor I knew all along they would, btw If that paper said lab or whatever in that blank 25% spot, those betting they were pure would just have to eat crow....and would. would I have had any choice in the matter? I've studied animals most of my life, & I'm also what they call "a good judge of horseflesh" (just comes natural) I knew they were purebred 1st time I saw 'em no faith required unfortunately, due to my own... liberal breeding practices ... I can't afford to be associatin' with them purebred black airedales, & them purebred black airedales DEFINITELY can't afford to be associatin' with the likes of me I'd only besmirch their reputation... so there's a certain bittersweetness to it all, on my end in any event, cheers, Southern! sometimes the truth is hard, & most people just run off from it you definitely have my respect for hanging tough all these years!!
|
|
|
Post by Undercover Cowboy on Dec 21, 2009 20:20:03 GMT -5
Well I've just been overcome with the Christmas Spirit.... Merry Christmas Everyone Doylecpt.. Then what makes up the 50% that is Airedale...? Or has anyone ever taken a dog in and had it come back with more than 50% Significant ?? Has anyone had a DNA done on a black and tan Airedale? I'll be hunting until the new year....
|
|
jax
Hunter/worker
Posts: 133
|
Post by jax on Dec 21, 2009 20:20:45 GMT -5
John I am assuming that AKC asked/paid/behested/requested Coady to survey the stock he previewed so as to provide his expertise in court. In other words I interpret the statement to mean that Coady was the AKC expert. All court issues seem to require "expertise". Cops on the stand give snippet resumes of their education and experience to lend credibility to their testimony. Professors, physicians etc etc all do the same. In the end result, it is an opinion based on their standing in the niche community they operate in. Coady, as a pro dog handler with years experience with Airedales fits that description don't you think?
Doyle I read the same thing you did. I should have said that the report indicates that as much as 37.5% of the sample was unidentifiable, 50% at least Airedale and 12.5% at least Bulldog which equals 100%. If in your opinion that is proof then congratulations. We are still only talking about a comparison of less than 8% of the identified Airedale Terrier genome used in this test. And even then up to 37.5% of the sample didn't jive.
Southern The only real "snow" anybody has been getting blows out of Demming, New Mexico.
|
|
|
Post by southern on Dec 21, 2009 20:33:12 GMT -5
thanks TD
|
|
|
Post by charlie on Dec 21, 2009 20:33:52 GMT -5
When you get your PHD in genitics, you can make the claims that you are, and it will hold water, but I guess working for a gas company means you did not go to school for this type of scientific Training, kinda leaves you in the dark. Have a Nice day Southern, please by all means tell me where you got your "PHD in genitics". Or any other "scientific Training" for that matter. You're the one who has historically made the claim that you have DNA proof. Explain to me your interpretation of the test you had done. I'm sure it will be quite technical and amusing, but I'm kinda slow, so please try to put it into layman's terms. It seems some on the board have some grasp of the issue and they are trying their asses off to help you out by saying the test validates what you claim. That's their opinion and they are certainly entitled to it. But the fact is that the test did not come back 100% Airedale. Or is my age addled brain missing something here? It's starting to appear to me that there may not even be an Airedale in existence that would test 100% Airedale. Has anyone in the brain trust out there ever heard of such a beast? How about any breed coming back as 100%? Much has been said before about the odds of producing an all black/red airedale. Figures have been thrown out in the billions or trillions to one. Those are pretty high odds. I'm with Brett. I think the odds of a dog somewhere in the past jumping over someone's fence are much more probable. It doesn't mean there was any intentional deception on anyone's part. Sh** happens. Respectfully awaiting YOUR interpretaion of the results. Charlie ---case not closed--- Just saw your post Sydney. You answered the 100% test result question. Thanks.
|
|