Re: familysearch.org not to be trusted

[Brian]

> I would ask who CAN be trusted. I wouldn't trust Ancestry as far as I could
> fling 'em, RootsWeb suffers from it's association with Ancestry, and the rest
> of the bunch, including Linkpendium, Mocavo and GeneaNet, are questionable, as
> well.
>
> But, then, what is it we're trusting? Are we saying we trust any of these
> groups/organizations to provide information we can incorporate into our
> personal databases without checking?
>
> It was Reagan, I think, who said in a different context, "trust, but verify".
> Might that not apply here?
>
> Suspicious Ol' Bob
>
> Bob Melson <amia...@mypacks.net> wrote:



I wouldn't trust anything I couldn't verify. My wife supposedly has a link
back to the Magna Charta done by a professional researcher but apparently it
depends on someone having a child at an unlikely young age although it might
have possible. And of course there could be an error in the age. And some of
here relatives claim a connection to George Washington but it depends on
someone who had two wives with the same first name.

Brian <drmorri...@comcast.net>

[Wes Groleau]

> It was Reagan, I think, who said in a different context, "trust, but verify".
> Might that not apply here?
>

> Bob Melson


For familysearch.org, because it is LDS, that's what I used to think. But now
that I know they are TELLING people to misrepresent documents, it is "do not
trust"


--
Wes Groleau

Change is inevitable. We need to learn that “inevitable" is
neither a synonym for “good" nor for “bad.”

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org>