Correspondence

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

THE NUMBER OF OUR ANCESTORS. To the Editor of the SCIENTIFIC AMEEICAN: My only excuse for asking you to give more space of your valuable paper to this question is that there still seems to exist a doubt as to the location of the fallacy in the proposition that ? generations ago we each had 2 ancestors; for, as Mr. Venning states, history probably justifies the conclusion that such a fallacy exists. As Mr. Eakin and Mr. Constable have shown, Mr. McCullough's contribution furnishes no solution to the problem; However, it contains a hint. Mr. Venning's calculation of the number of A's ancestors is based upon the assumption that the two members of every marriage among his progenitors have been totally unrelated. However, had some of these couples certain ancestors in common, a reduction in the number of A's ancestors would result. .And looking from Mr. McCullough's point of view, which shows well the large number of descendants ordinarily following in several generations from one couple, we can easily imagine that the marriage of distant relatives occurs with unsuspected frequency. Ithaca, N. Y. ROBERT KING.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American