Doug wrote - For all readers, the last sentence truly identifies the problem. Eddy really doesn't care about real ancestry("care not a whit")...only about his ego and never having to admit he made a mistake. He would much rather mislead and deceive the innocent, than acknowledge his error and allow everyone to move on. Fortunately, there are dedicated people like Richard and myself to help those duped by Eddy to see the light.
Gusman - There is nothing in the affidavits on which to build an ancestral connection with the father of affidavit Cornelius Van Siclen so I know of no reason why I should care a whit about his ancestry.
Gusman - Quoting Doug - "Fortunately, there are dedicated people like Richard and myself..."
Gusman - Nothing more self satisfying than Doug giving himself that aura of self importance.
Doug wrote -The fact that (affidavit) Maria's father did not serve in the Revolution...
Gusman - To Doug (or Richard) Please provide conclusive evidence that one of the names on the Revolutionary Veteran's records is not a variant spelling foraffidavit Cornelius Van Siclen? Prove your allegations!
Doug wrote - Share costs with you? Not a chance. Records have already proven you wrong. If it takes DNA testing to wake you up, then I intend to make you pay every cent of the cost. Your ignorance of genealogy is only exceeded by your arrogance. There is a very important lesson you need to learn, and it should rightly cost you dearly. So...I say again...loser pays ALL costs. It's your move.
Gusman There it is again - continuous confrontational adversarial dialog by Doug. It was Doug who suggested DNA testing, I thought it was a good way to go. Doug suggests "loser pays all" only because he knows I will not agree to his terms.
Gusman - If I were to agree, Doug would merely find another way to waffle out prior to the signing of a contract.
Gusman -Here is a second suggestion Douglas. Doug agrees to pay all of the costs leading to a DNA report for Annetje Lossing - I will pay all of the costs for a DNA report for Maria Van Siclen. Doug will not be sharing costs with me - Doug will be paying only expenses leading to DNA results for Annetje Lawson.
Gusman - Under an agreed upon contract and prior to beginning the investigation, we each deposit in a mutually acceptable bank the sum of $50,000 (total deposit $100,000). I authorize the Bank to withdraw and pay billing as received for Maria Van Siclen's DNA investigation. You do likewise for payment of billing for Annetje Lawson's DNA investigation.
Gusman -Individual funds in the joint DNA Investigation Account can be dissolved only AFTER the DNA results are received at the Bank for either Maria Van Siclen or Annetje Lawson. That will prohibit either of us from withdrawing any part of the funds we deposited until the DNA results are determined and received by the Bank.
Gusman - The balance of funds remaining in the individul account making up one half of the joint DNA Investigation Account which achieves DNA final results can be withdrawn by the owner of his account. Funds belonging to whichever individul (Doug or myself) has not received DNA results remain locked into that individuals fund until DNA results are received by the bank from the testing laboratory. The lock remains in place until the death of the party who has not received DNA results.
Gusman -In the event of the death of that account individual,there will be included in the contract a provision that whatever funds are owned by the individual who defaults on the DNA investigation results remaining in his fund will be released to a designated charity of his choice. The individual's heirs will not inherit the balance of the funds.
Doug wrote - For two years you have offered absolutely nothing as evidence, except those two affadavits. Surely if those affadavits were true, in two years you would have no trouble locating records to prove them true. So let's see your evidence...a list of all the documents relating to this family and dated before 1850. I am sure anyone reading this would want to know what supporting documents you have. With so many millions of records readily searchable in both Canada and New York, you should be able to find something pertaining to your "affadavit" couple, for certain. What.....are you having trouble finding records? Not surprising, since fictitious people don't leave records. Get a clue.
Gusman - Doug is correct about my presentation of the affidavits - I present only the affidavits and will continue to present only the affidavits as evidence that affidavit Cornelius Van Siclen and his wife are the parents of the Maria Van Siclen married to Luther Calvin Eastling.
Gusman - On the other hand it is Doug who has challenged the veracity of the affidavites using allegations that Catherine Johnson is a fictitious name and her husband Cornelius Van Siclen was not a Revolutionary Veteran.
Gusman - Doug needs to do a very simple thing. (1) Explain why whatever alleged name is/was known to the deponents for 31 and 40 years respectively and which was passed to Violetta, is not on the DAR application or a blank box is not where the name Catherine Johnson appears because the DAR required no name for membership approval.
Gusman - Doug continues not able to explain why Violetta would conspire with her mother and uncle to create a fictitious name if she had been told by them througout her 51 years the name alleged by Doug to be her great grandmother. While Doug is doing that he can also include in his explanation why, whatever Doug's alleged name may be for the wife of affidavite Van Siclen, that Doug's specific alleged name doesn't appear in the affidavits.
Gusman - I am considering one more proposal for DNA research if you do not find the one presented here acceptable, It may require that you put up $150,000 in front money matched by myself and deposited in a mutually approved bank.
Gusman - I am uncertain about presenting that one at this time.