Ok, Chris, I thought about my reply to you on YDNA.I appreciate your compliment about my work and accept same and would use that to encourage your positive choice to have a 67 marker FT DNA yDNA test through the McKee Group where you will receive some sort of discount from the cost.If you can't do 67 you should not consider less than 37 markers.At one time, in the early days of the genealogy yDNA, it was thought 12 or 25 would be more than sufficient.The science is progressing and now there is talk of a 100 hundred marker test coming out from FT DNA.(Family Tree DNA)There are other companies but I believe there are more McKee and like surnames with FTDNA than any other company and the only good the test will do you is to compare with other people and their lineage.There are other considerations but for genealogy the last sentence is true.
If money is no problem, you can go straight to FTDNA and click on the PROJECTS tab and click on "M" in yDNA Projects and then scroll way down to McKee and follow the instructions.It is expensive for most of us and that is where one has to decide to continue to sit on the fence and, perhaps, never make any further progress in their search or, take a chance, and go for the yDNA.If you begin to study what it is all about and, perhaps, join RootsWeb mailing list Genealogy-DNA and Y-DNA and a number of other DNA mailing lists and you can learn a lot and also have your questions answered by the folks who are up on the latest ongoing info on yDNA.The DNA Forum here on GenForum is a ditto of that.There are other forums, these just happen to be where I learn and observe.
The McKee Group has been inactive for awhile and I would not tell you otherwise.I had learned to download FTDNA results to Excel and work on the individual results and group them together for comparison but FTDNA has revised their site and I have not conquered moving the marker results to my excel yet.If you are computer literate you would not have any trouble with it I am sure.
I think if you post your questions we can find further answers
You would be a hugh benefit to those who have tested........we have a tight McKee group going for eight McKee, a McGee, some Kee, etc.
An unknown cousin of my husband from about 1840-1850 Rutherford Co TN and their (cousin and husband)common ancestor was discovered and showed a match withthe cousin and my husband and they have proven that lineage from Ambrose McKee back to Mecklenburg Co NC by virtue of their match and paper trail.Neither of them knew of the other prior to that time.I will give you more details by email where you can see that for yourself if you like.
We have some matches with Canadian McKee including Kevin McKee of California, first well known McKee website a decade or more ago, and a Canadian Kee from Ireland who goes back to McKee proven ancestry in Ireland.
Not all matches are that lucky and some don't find any kin at all so it is a little like a lottery or some such.Some see only kin from hundreds of years ago with no hint of how kin. The science is evolving.
So, I made this reply on this old post so it would remind you of how long you have been searching.Also, my reply to your earlier post here goes back to my earliest posting history on GenForum and you might recall our previous messages and also those other searchers reading this might see our earlier messages.
The third part of my message title, middle Tennessee McKee.There are so many McKee possibilites that you will most likely never know FOR CERTAIN, without yDNA, or some sort of DNA, to backup your paper trail.With the advent of the internet there will always be someone to question your McKee.
You can be a leader among those claiming descent of the Maury and Williamson County Tennessee McKee surname. As far as I know no one has made public their results to those McKee.