Autosomal dna

[motatalea]

there are some questions i want to know their answers please
1-Why scientists care still until now of physcial anthropology science ?Is it right that genetics science is more better and accurate than this science?and Why scientists donnot cancel physical anthropolgy and replace it totaly by genetic science ?
2- scientists always classify people by seeing their features (like borreby, breunn,corded,halstatt nordic, faelish....... and so on)but the probleme is that their classification may be true and may be false so why they donnt classify people according to their genes(autosomes which ressponsible for physical features) to confirm their features 100%?
3-I have seen that they are divide europeans in the autosomal dna test in to four big parts (Middle eastern,south eastern european,Northern european and south asian),My question is :are there more divisions than those fours? if there are found more divisions could you please tell me the all divisions of european heritage that they have reached in researches until now?
4- I have heard that Susan sarandon has mt-DNA haplogroup H ,Could you tell me please which subclade of H does she have?

[Maciamo]

1. Anthropology and genetics are complementary. Anthropology deals with the physical appearance of people. So far genetics are not evolved enough to know what people look like based on DNA. Only a few very basic things can be known, like skin or eyes colour. Even hair colour cannot be predicted accurately. As for morphology, the shape of the head, nose, ears, etc, geneticists still have a long way to go before they can make even simple predictions.

2. That's the aim, but we aren't there yet. It will take many more years (or decades).

3. Yes, there are many more divisions, but at present genetics cannot be much more accurate. Some genes have a clear gradient from east to west, others from north to south, others from north-west to south-east. There are over 20,000 genes so it will take time to analyse everything.

4. I have no idea. If it's not on the Internet there is no way I could know about it.

[motatalea]

1. Anthropology and genetics are complementary. Anthropology deals with the physical appearance of people. So far genetics are not evolved enough to know what people look like based on DNA. Only a few very basic things can be known, like skin or eyes colour. Even hair colour cannot be predicted accurately. As for morphology, the shape of the head, nose, ears, etc, geneticists still have a long way to go before they can make even simple predictions.

2. That's the aim, but we aren't there yet. It will take many more years (or decades).

3. Yes, there are many more divisions, but at present genetics cannot be much more accurate. Some genes have a clear gradient from east to west, others from north to south, others from north-west to south-east. There are over 20,000 genes so it will take time to analyse everything.

4. I have no idea. If it's not on the Internet there is no way I could know about it.

thanks too much