I know this message was written to Sandy, but for the life of me, I can't understand how anyone would take "information" and use it as fact. Facts are those things proven. If a cousin of mine has proven data, wills, b/c, m/c, etc. that are actual paper records of a proven ancestor, then copies can be shared and assumed to be factual. If however, aunt Emmy told cousin Grace that Uncle George was a relative of the President, I and each one out there would consider that hearsay, and though it may be noted, you would check it out. But, somewhere along the line, we must accept that which is historically recorded, even though it is recorded as legend. I have a Journal written by my g-gmothers Uncle recording his travels all over the western hemispheres. It is great reading and family history, but until I prove him being in those places and leaving his progeny all over the west, that's all it is, just family history. I still am trying to find my maternal grandmothers place of birth and proof of her parents. Too many GREEN's and not enough time! Sorry for the novel, but we should all be detectives. Harold Williams, Rootsweb Sponsor Mesquite, TX (Dallas suburb) willhn@flash.net -----Original Message----- From: Mary Lou Lugo <mlugo@snet.net> To: GREEN-L@rootsweb.com <GREEN-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Sunday, February 14, 1999 6:06 AM Subject: [GREEN-L] Fiction or Fact??? : Sandy, that makes sense but if you were to come across books (sm., :med., or lg.) on your ancestors that others had writen would you still try to go :back & verify everything in them or do a few & then take the word writen down ?? :If people before us had taken the time to do the research years ago, shouldnt we :believe what they wrote ??? Mary Lou : :Seirls@aol.com wrote: : :> I don't think many of us are just plucking information off the internet and :> jotting it down in our books as fact. I use the information people share with :> me to start ordering records -- census documents, wills, etc. But, I admit, I :> do short-cut information when I'm posting to see if I can find connections :> with other researchers. As you say, it takes a lot of time to write out all :> the proofs and conjectures and most of us don't have that time to do it into a :> void. When I posted the note about the Griffin/Green family today, I wasn't :> sure anyone else was researching the family -- and as I mentioned in my :> subsequent note, I discovered a great number of people are researching those :> lines -- so I was simply casting out information to see what came back. :> :> I look at some of this e-mail as a way to introduce ourselves -- hey, this is :> who I'm looking at, and this is what I'm hearing/have learned/have found out. :> Do you have the same information? Where can I find more information? :> Sometimes, it's as weak as where the devil do I start looking for my family, :> especially with names as common as Rogers, Green, Griffin, and so on. When I'm :> contacted, and when I write up my notes, I certainly keep track of the :> controversies, the differing opinions, and the actual reports from census :> information, wills, etc. And I share what I learn -- good or bad -- with the :> others who have shared with me or who contact me later. :> :> And that is what has made the Internet a great tool for genealogy -- not that :> someone else is doing your work for you or that you're sitting around just :> sucking up information without verifying it, but because it gives you some :> good ideas where to start looking, and gives you a chance to swap primary :> source documentation with other researchers. :> :> Sandy :