I agree with Cornelia 100% as I have found many leads on the internet. The only garbage I ever see is from somebody who must live in a perfect world and doesn't accept anything unless it's verified but the Supreme Court. vernl Cornelia Warner wrote: > This is exactly WHY we post our messages and queries to the lists, > websites, etc. to ensure that enough researchers can look at data, right or > wrong, examine it, discuss it, hypothesise about it, bring in new data, > correlate it or discard it. chemical researchers, medical researchers, or > family researchers, it doesn't matter. all research requires an examination > of the facts, the hypothesis, the falicies, over and over until a basis of > data becomes factual. That doesn't mean absolutely correct. those records > we call primary, are full of errors. someone didn't know, couldn't > remember, lied...whatever. However, I can hardly see Bible records, > considered a primary source in genealogical research, as "garbage". Actual > research garbage is false data, especially that which is intentionally used > to misslead the researcher, but also the wishful dreams of a victorian > ancestor who would like to think that they are descended from Pocahontas, > George Washington, or Betsy Ross, or the Captain of a ship, inventor or > explorer, and who, in the process of such wishfulness, wrote down such > unproven and usually unfactual information in their diary, or even, in > their own research. in reality, many of those stories, as Sam Clemmens > said, are greatly exaggerated. How many times I have followed such will 'o > the wisps with careful documentation policies, I hate to say. (I had a very > wishful grandmother.) if we keep our information to ourselves, how then do > we verify it? documentation? well, ok, but what if it's wrong? I've seen > something with three documents to it that was soundly disproved by another, > so you can't swear by documentation. You can, however, trust full, thorough > research. > All I see is someone trying to untangle a confusing genealogy of common > names, and asking for help in doing so. In the process, they are providing > Bible records to many people, some who may be descendants and may not even > know a Bible exists for this family. who of us hasn't found a confusing > genealogy in their research? like the black sheep, if you haven't found one > yet, you will. > Cornelia > > >If you don't have any idea of the accuracy of this information, why in the > world would you dump this > >much garbage out there? Wouldn't be a better idea just to wait to see if > anyone is interested in > >this guesswork and then send it to them privately? > >-----Original Message----- > >From: DITTOBYTE <DITTOBYTE@aol.com>