Gusman - Two twins are born on the same day. The twins reach any age. Remove their names from any documents wherein there names appear, then add their birth dates to the documents and ask anyone who didn't know the twins or their background and ask the individula who now holds the twins records to assign the twins name to the correct documents. They have an exact 50 percent chance of being correct.
Interesting example. But if Maria were twins it wouldn't matter which child you are talking about, the parents would be the same. If Maria wasn't a twin...which the baptismal record shows she wasn't....then the date match does establish who her real parents were. Van Sicklen and Van Siclen are the same family name, different spelling is all. I can say without reservation that there was only one Maria born on exactly Sep 15, 1801, under either spelling of the surname AND with a father named Cornelius who died in Canada in March of 1850. What you insist must have happened - 2 different girls born exactly the same day, whose fathers had identical first names and death dates - is a virtually impossible set of coincidences. There is only one person on the entire face of the earth that will believe it could possibly have happened...and his name is Ed Gusman.
As to your idiotic argument that Cornelius Van Sicklen married to Hannah Lawson in Fishkill and Cornelius Van Sicklen married to Hannah Lossing in Fishkill constitutes two different couples because of the spelling of the wife's last name - Church recordkeepers and historians will readily certify them to be the same couple, and a judge will readily accept that testimony in establishing that Maria of Fishkill was the daughter of Cornelius of Brighton. The evidence at hand is sufficient to have Violet Voorhees DAR membership declared invalid in court, should you decide it necessary to press it that far. Personally, the fact that Violet gained membership to the DAR using false information is of no interest to me.(The DAR is of no interest or importance to me, period) She wasn't the first to do so, and probably won't be the last. The DAR has little significant value(genealogically speaking) because they have never put forth any real effort to determine the validity of applicant's claims of ancestry. Errors are common in DAR files, which is why genealogists are reluctant to use them as sources. So...the line has been proven, the affadavits are proven to contain false information. Noone is going to believe in your precious "under oath" documents, unless you can provide evidence to support the claims made. It is still up to you....provide supporting documents or be a man and admit your error. Sorry, but the DAR application/affadavits are still works of fiction.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|