In article <47bb79c3.42958901@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) writes: > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:49:22 GMT, Tim Powys-Lybbe <tim@powys.org> > wrote: > >>In message of 19 Feb, Eagle@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh Sullivan) wrote: >> >><snip on making hypotheses> >> >>> How does one do any of those for most families prior to about 1900 >>> because there is seldom, if ever, a way to contest recorded entries >>> since additional eveidence will probably never be available. >>> >>> If you can't test the truth/accuracy seems like recorded statements >>> must be accepted as fact thus no longer hypotheses. >> >>Not completely true. For instance my gt-grandfather at the time of his >>marriage in 1875 said his father was deceased. In fact said gt-gf died >>in 1888 and his father did not do that until 1897. > >>The quality of the gt-gf's statement was that of a lie. He was only 19 >>and was dodging the need for his father to approve his under-age >>marriage. > > That doesn't deny what I said. You tested and proved it wrong. I did > that with my gg grand's birth year. Perhaps the difference is that it > was not a hypothesis until someone tested. > >>Personally I think the much more reasonable method is to assume that all >>recorded statements are true and only assert them to be false when some >>contradictory evidence appears. > > I believe that is a restatement of what I said - and equally true. I > also think recorded statements are probably more accurate than people > statements in many cases. People often have ulterior motives for their > statements. It's astounding how many ladies get pregnant on their > honeymoon - or have premies. > > Hugh I think it was President Reagan who said it: "Trust, but verify". Certainly, a different context, but valid here, none-the-less. Bob -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason so few engage in it. -- Henry Ford