In the unlikely event that anyone is actually following this absurd exchange, allow to me summarize Eddy's last several posts into short and simple terms.Eddy is saying:
"I believe genealogy should be limited to stories told by family members.I don't know how to research and don't even care to learn.I have no supporting records, and don't need any, because I have family letters telling "how it was".Original source documents only have value if they agree with family stories.Any records that deviate from family stories in the least bit are obviously incorrect, since it is clearly impossible for a family member to make a mistake.Further, I don't need to research, because I already know everything, and you should believe everything I say just because I know everything.Clearly research should be avoided, as it just clouds the truth told by the family members.Whenever challenged by anyone possessing contradictory records, I will distract from the real issues by using surname spelling as a main point, using tired cliches, attacking the valid records anyway I can, and insisting that family stories must be believed without question, as well contradictory records must never be considered at all."
As mentioned previously, Cornelius Van Siclen(exact spelling) is buried with his son, Ferdinand Van Sicklin(exact spelling) at Brighton.Ferdinand's dates match the baptism of Ferdinand, s.o. Cornelius Van Sicklen(exact spelling) and Hannah Lawson at New Hackensack.The name on the Cemetery where both are buried is the "Van Sicklen" Cemetery".(exact spelling), and Cornelius' other son, John, is buried as "John Van Sicklen".(exact spelling)All of these in one cemetery.Don't take my word for it...check it out yourself.Eddy, your claims about the importance of the spelling of surnames 200 years ago reflects your total ignorance of life in the early 1800s.All it takes is a few minutes of real research and you will find records of the family living on lot B-29, Brighton(Cornelius' land) under half a dozen spelling variations.Spelling of a surname was not important 200 years ago, and deeds prove that frequently land was sold under a different spelling than which it was purchased.Had you ever bothered with actual research, you would not be ignorant of this fact.Is spelling important today?Much more so than then, but if you should receive a bill for valid services, even today, in which your name is accidentally spelled wrong, you will still have to pay the bill.I would love to see you try to weasle out of a bill because of a spelling error.Yes, Eddy...the court will still make you pay.A spelling variation will not eliminate a valid debt, even today.
I do not rely on one 1801 baptism record as my sole proof.My proof, clearly displayed throughout this message board and on my website detailing the Van Sicklen/Eastling connection, is a collection of records that when considered together clearly prove that Cornelius Van Sicklen and Hannah Lasson in the Fishkill baptism are Cornelius Van Siclen and Hannah Lawson buried in Brighton.Your ramblings about how blood lines are tied to exact spellings is utter nonsense, and anyone reading these exchanges will already know that.Your responses reek of your desperation to have someone believe in your fantasy.Funny you should mention Matthew P Lasson of Fishkill.Yes, he was a relative of Hannah's...a first cousin.And where did he end up living?On lot B28, Brighton, Ontario...next to Cornelius and Hannah...as Matthew P Lawson.Sorry Eddy, but your exact spelling nonsense is nothing but pure ignorance...and Hannah Lawson is still Maria Van Siclen Eastling's mother.And Catharine Johnson is still an error.