All it means is that, regardless of the cause controversy, the results of genetic studies in any case is not absolute, and that they initially need to be thoroughly and repeatedly tested. In any case, the oficial results of genetic studies (with P.Ivanov) in any case can not be independent of evidentiary value in the identification of the Ekaterinburg remains as the remains of Tsar's family."

We'll look other problems and shortcomings of official DNA tests later in the section «"Resurrection" of Franziska Shanzkowska» (subsection «DNA-testing is not “A sacred cow”»)

In addition, Dr. Popov has put in his letter the following questions about the old and the new "Yekaterinburg remains" (quote from reductions in my retelling)

1. From the transcript of the initial inspection of the place of burial (11-13 July 1991) and from the explanation of the first searchers (Avdonin and Ryabov), we can conclude that the volume of excavation of burial were so small that it could not accommodate three skulls, allegedly found there and seized by these people. Dr. Popov writes (verbatim, in my translation): "Maybe these skull were not found and removed from the burial in 1979, but were placed into the grave in 1980, when Avdonin and Ryabov again" worked" in this grave?"

2. The skull, allegedly belonging to Nicholas II (skull number 4), has no trace of wounds he received in Japan in 1891. Meanwhile, the famous report of three doctors who provided medical assistance in 1891 in Japan, immediately after the attack: in this report doctors talked about a piece of bone 2.5 cm long, which they removed from head of Nicholas.

3. As I wrote above, the genetic examination of the new remains, "Alexis" and "Maria" (or "Anastasia") in 2007 was conducted with two teeth (which were found among these remains) – but some experts stated categorically that there are no morphological evidence that these two teeths could belong to any member of the royal Romanov's family

4. As evidence of the belonging of these remains to the royal Romanov's family, a photo superposition was performed. In many aspects, this photo superposition was, to say the least, imperfect. In particular, Dr. Popov noted that two experts photo superposition came to two different conclusions about the skull number 4 (allegedly belonging to Nicholas II).

5. Sculptural reconstruction of the heads of the royal Romanov's family is extremely unsatisfactory, because the sculptor knew who they should be similar. Dr. Popov also wrote (verbatim, in my translation ): "Such a reconstruction would have a conclusive legal effect only if "sculptor" has never seen in his lifetime the images of these people's faces, sculpted portraits which he produces."

(The letter to Dr. Popov you can read in full on the link:(in Russian))

A short list of evidence of identity of Anna Anderson and Anastasia.

For those who would like to study the problem of identification of Anna Anderson, I advise you to read two books:

«Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson" by Peter Kurth;

"The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson, and the World's Greatest Royal Mystery" by Greg King & Penny Wilson.

These studies in most detail set forth the arguments "for (yes)" and "against (no)" an identification of Anna Anderson as tsar's daughter Anastasia. My criticism of the book by G. King and P. Wilson is here presented in a separate section of this publication («" Resurrection "of Franziska Shanzkowska»). Below I briefly lay out its findings of these studies – in favor of this identification.

1. It is known the dozens (at least about forty) somehow confirmed later stories by Anna Anderson about the life of the Russian tsar family, which could not be known to anyone but the tsar's daughter, and which till now has not refuted or discredited by her opponents (see Amazon.com. Customer Reviews on the King&wilson's book \"The Resurrection of the Romanovs: Anastasia, Anna Anderson, and the World's Greatest Royal Mystery"/)

2. It is known the diagnoses (psychological aspects of medical reports) of the seven doctors of Anna Tchaikovsky (Anderson) from various psychiatric hospitals and health centers. Four of these doctors were professional psychologist (Dr.). All known diagnoses and medical reports say that (quote) "Mrs. Anna Tchaikovsky (Anderson) could born and live earlier only into an aristocratic family." All doctors unanimously rejected (and I quote) "the possibility of fraud, or hypnosis, or psychopathy in its self-identity." – This is the main conclusion of all physicians.

In particular, the famous German psychiatrist in 1925, Bonhoeffer wrote: "Her posture, facial expressions and grace in a manner of speaking are indicating that she comes from an educated family … She probably grew up surrounded by the Grand Duchess, she was the daughter of an officer of the tsar's court or any of the royal family … She could not take over all it from the books or stories of others." ("Anastasia. Riddle Grand Princess" Peter Kurth, p.103, 104). In addition, I quote below the certificate of another psychiatrist of the sanatorium "Shtillehaus" in Oberstdorf, where AA was in the autumn and winter of 1927 ("Anastasia. Riddle Grand Princess" Peter Kurth, p.150-153).