Remarkably preserved? Don't you mean "plasticized"? :) Dean, A10FLYR ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas E. Lassek" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 10:48:17 AM Subject: Re: [NEPLATTE] OH NO !! Hehehehe -  Wife : Shera Danese Falk 62 (remarkably preserved). I "met" her. Tomasz

Anymore I really don't know. There was a time when you could kinda-sorta judge a persons age, more or less, simply by looking at them. I'm talking about our parents time period back to the earliest of pioneers (judging by their photos). From around 1930 on it seems as if a few select individuals attempt to employ anything and everything in order to look like a 30 year old. Shoot, I haven't looked 30 years of age since I turned 20 !! This has to affect genealogists in research since one can no longer judge a persons age with any degree of accuracy. Sometimes a photo is the only discriminating factor - today one may well look 30, but in the end one may find that they are actually 104, and it's becoming more common place. I present - you judge : http://www.zimbio.com/Shera+Danese/articles/4p43jBGHcQh/Shera+Danese+Widow+Peter+Falk Tomasz On Jun 30, 2011, at 12:57 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > > Remarkably preserved? Don't you mean "plasticized"? :) > > > Dean, > A10FLYR > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Thomas E. Lassek" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 10:48:17 AM > Subject: Re: [NEPLATTE] OH NO !! > > Hehehehe - > > Wife : Shera Danese Falk 62 (remarkably preserved). I "met" her. > > Tomasz > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message