This is an incorrect statement: "You say I do not know how to assemble evidence>". Genealogical work requires objectivity and care for details. Thus, it would be a good exercise to look back at what I actually wrote and see how you twisted my statement.
The "fact" that DAR "recanted" anything or that they in fact made any "mistakes" in the first place is your interpretation. And the evidence I have seen on this and related boards is that your interpretations diverge from mine (and others).
How would I improve on your "conclusions"? Briefly, I would finish the work. Long ago I learned the difference, in genealogy, between uncovering evidence that something might be true and conducting thorough research to attempt to determine whether it is indeed true. As I stated in the previous post, you have only done the former. Finding a couple of names that match does not constitute "coupling" or "proof". In and of itself, finding that a surname occurs only once in tax records is virtually worthless in terms of "proof". Plus, there was a very interesting response to you in the DNA forum that questioned your interpretation of those pay records you put forward as such important "proof".
The way to deal with DAR is to do thorough genealogical work. You have been offered help on this forum. DAR is always eager to prove new patriots. Many others have faced the challenges you are facing to prove a line and have succeeded. Their work is on record with DAR, and would most probably be edifying.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|