This applies to the Kornegay family history also. "Just because it's in print - don't make it necessarily so" Ruth >Resent-Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 05:58:23 -0700 (PDT) >From: M_Lighthall@prodigy.com (MS MARY G LIGHTHALL) >Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 08:57:37, -0500 >Old-To: RICH-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Internet Message >Resent-Message-ID: <"ApUK2B.A.63B.th3n1"@fp-1.rootsweb.com> >To: RICH-L@rootsweb.com >Resent-From: RICH-L@rootsweb.com >X-Mailing-List: <RICH-L@rootsweb.com> archive/latest/214 >X-Loop: RICH-L@rootsweb.com >Resent-Sender: RICH-L-request@rootsweb.com > >About NY RIches: > >In the Rich Family Association some of these Riches are known at the >Cattaraugus Riches. Also it is known as a generalization--and I >recognize that all generalizations are false, ... .-- that several >families from different immigrant ancestors are mixed up among them. >A lot of work has been done on the Riches of that region. In >"Kinfolk," we are very careful whenever we publish anything about >them. > >So this is a word of caution, be very careful in your research, and >do to original sources for your data. > >This medium, the Rich list and e-mail, are wonderful for gathering >data and references to sources. But this area is just like >publications as in Kinfolk. We have to put in a note that we cannot >verify data submitted and accept no responsibility for its accuracy. > > >I am remined of a lecture in an advanced Chem. course. The professor >spent an hour expandine on one sentence from the text book. The >sentence was wrong and he proved it. At the end he said something >like, "Look out, just because it is in print it is not >necessicarily > > >