1. There is no secret. Doug has laid out your proper ancestry. It does not require any affidavits to do this. It requires genealogical research. This has been done for you.
2. Because this seems to continually get jumbled in your thinking, let me say, again, that there was Daddy and Son Corneliuses. Let's call one Cornelius I and the other Cornelius II.Cornelius I married--as his sencond wife--Catherine Johnson. Cornelius I and his second wife Catherine had Cornelius II. Cornelius II married Hannah Lawson (the Angilicized version of her name) and they had Maria and Ferd, among others. Cornelius II is the person mentioned in the affidavits. As you note though not in this context, Cornelius II was born too late to have been a soldier in the Revolution. Cornelius I's record is that which is being discussed, but it is ascribed to the wrong generation.
3. Maria and Ferd appear from the transcipt to have said that their mother was Catherine Johnson. That is, they said that Cornelius II married Catherine Johnson. They confused Cornelius I with Cornelius II--if indeed this is what they really said.We don't know why at this late date, but speaking for myself, and perhaps for Doug, the feeling is that they either were confused themselves, or by Violetta's mistake, or that the affidavit transciber took down their words wrong. I think it is probably the later as one would expect that Maria and Ferdinand would know the name of their mother. Because the Dutch families used the same names over and over, specifically to honor their ancestors (genealogists call these the Dutch Naming Conventions--check them out; they help to define your family and its origins), such a confusion is really rather routine among those who are not used to the naming conventions.
4. Cornelius II died died between 1805 and 1806, the dates of execution and probate of his will. He died in New York State. I did not say he died in 1850. You have said that. It is not true that he died in 1850. Cornelius II evidently died in 1850.
5. Cornelius II and his wife Hannah Lawson removed from New York State to Canada. Doug has laid this all out for you and it need not be repeated. He has alerted you to their burial place and the inscriptions on their graves stones. (Incidently, it makes not the slightest difference exactly where they died. What matters is that they are buried where they are buried anf that the dates on their sones reflect the dates gathered by Doug from the New York records. Lots of people die far from their final resting place.)
6. No one is making allegations, at least I am not. Again, you mistake genealogical research.
7. Doug had told you of precise records he has found of the births or baptisms of some of the children mentioned in the Bible records. He has not said that there were not other children besides those for whom he found records. Again, you mistake proper genealogical research.
8. You have said, "During the two years that I have had the affidavits and DAR application I have not been able to discern a clue therein that would conclusively and EXCLUSIVELY link the affidavit Cornelius Van Siclen to any lineage." iI seems to me that we have been treated to your meanderings for more like a decade. Be that as it may, two years is plenty of time to have acquired official birth and deaths records, census records, land records, and the various other items of official record keeping that would either prove your point, or help you to see the errors. Why not do that?
9. Again speaking for myself, but perhaps for Doug as well, I am not here to do you research for you. I think we have both, in our own ways, been entirely generous and patient with you.
10. You have said, "Then too about accuracy with spelling of names you wrote – “John Linington, father of Samuel Linnington and John Linington (brothers, despite how each chose to spell their surnames). “ What if I were to research a genealogy using the spelling John Linnington and Samuel Linington would I be able to create an accurate genealogy for each man using my illustrated and incorrect spelling for John and Samuel? Would the mixed up bloodlines make a difference to their descendants? If accuracy of spelling is so unimportant to you why your concern with the surname spelling of John and Samuel." Your point is entirely lost on me. However, a genealogy on this family has been published, by me, back in 1995, and is available at the New York Genealogical & Biographical Society. Naturally, the various ways that the surname is spelled over time, and in published records is discussed. This is true, too, of the variations one finds in the Van Sicklen, VanSickle, etc. family.
11. Lastly, you have said, "I note that you have ceased to write that Catherine Johnson is the SECOND wife of the affidavit Cornelius Van Siclen." I have done no such thing. When the conversation turned to the children of Catherine Johnson, specifically Cornelius II VS, I had no need to bring up the first wife. I had already done so beyond would have been normally necessary to try to be clear to you.