• 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    46
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    DNA doesn’t tell you who a person is without having a sample from a person to compare it to… We’d be able to tell if they were human or not. That’s about it.

    Not only that, but afaik there isn’t just 1 body interred there. It’s a whole mess of unidentified bodies buried together.

    • @Depress_Mode
      link
      9
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you had access to a large genetic database, it would theoretically be possible to find living relatives, provided at least one (even quite distant) relative is included in that database. It may be possible to then retrace familial history to determine who specifically it may have been.

      That’s more or less how they managed to find the Golden State Killer. Someone noticed that the GSK’s DNA had distantly related DNA listed in GEDmatch’s private database and family trees were constructed to narrow down suspects until only one remained based on timing, location, and other details. The person listed in the database and the GSK were so distantly related that they only shared a great-great-great-great grandfather.

    • @Tekomepossenomo
      link
      71 year ago

      And the gender. And whether they had chromosomal anomalies

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Unless there was a serious mixup, we already know the soldier was one of four randomly selected males.

  • @MotoAsh
    link
    261 year ago

    The tomb would exist with or without bodies being identified. Even if we identified all combatants, there are plenty of other casualties that could deserve similar anonymous respect.