>>4228821First, the science behind genetic ancestry is sound as fuck and was based on btfo'ing social constructionist views of race. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Second, this whole being anti-ancestry services meme can be traced back to a garbage crackedcom article that provided 0 evidence, made claims that contradict the actual consumer process, and refused to name which of the several competing companies it even referred to.
It is literal fake news. In this respect the one thing that these companies do deserve some criticism for is not making clear enough the difference in confidence ranges that they offer to you. So while they only show confidence ranges that are greater than 50%, I would personally prefer the default interface start at 70-80%, with 50 to 90% being options from there. They instead have the interface default at 50% where you have to click a single button to change it to 60, 70, 80 or 90%.
It is best to leave a small % unassigned rather than confuse the average normie that the .01% x surprise result you had is say only at a 52% confidence, and the result falls away when you require 60%+. People instead misunderstand speculative results for definitive, even though the former aren't necessarily unsound or misleading when presented as explicitly speculative (which these companies tend to actually do to an extent, right on the damn user interface).