Fw: Fw: Quantifying The Number Of Distant Ancestors

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Leo van de Pas

Fw: Fw: Quantifying The Number Of Distant Ancestors

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 26 aug 2007 13:19:51

James,

You do stun me, "Amongst the descendants" you do find spouses, as otherwise
the descendants list would be incomplete, why should they not be mentioned
when I said that I had made a list? I regard Kirk Douglas as a greater star
than his son Michael.
.
Spencer Hines is only stirring, as I declined to send him that list.
Here he is destroying Gen-Med but expects all the curtesies?

I told him and everyone, that the information in due course will be
available on Genealogics, let him wait for that.

As it is, I am stunned with the amount of information that has been made
available, from several different directions, after I had made that list. I
have been busy adding the new information but I am far from finished.

Best wishes
Leo
.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL@rootsweb.com
Cc: <Jwc1870@AOL..com
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2007 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Quantifying The Number Of Distant Ancestors


Dear Leo,
I have to agree with Spencer on the point that not every
spouse among the descendants of an individual should be counted as
themselves a
descendant. no matter whom the Father or the Mother may be. Some are (In
this
case [Isabel de Vermandois] it is likely that several couples are in
fact both
descended from her, yet several is not all.
Sincerely,

James W Cummings

Dixmont, Maine USA



************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new
AOL at
http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


D. Spencer Hines

Re: Fw: Quantifying The Number Of Distant Ancestors

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 26 aug 2007 16:40:57

Leo, intensely embarrassed at his gaffe, is trying to confuse the Gentle
Readers with bafflegab mixed with backing and filling and weasel wording in
order to make folks forget what he actually wrote so he can run away from it

Here it is again, the version he wants us to forget about, as he walks the
cat back:

"A very kind person helped me with information about the Stuyvesant family,
I have digested this and made a file just to see what it brought together
and it is quite amazing (to me) who are to be found amongst the descendants
of this family. Kirk Douglas, Montgomery Clift, Eleanor Roosevelt, Robert
Traill Spence Lowel IV, Adam von Trott zu Solz (involved in the conspiracy
against Hitler), Princess Maria Antonia de Braganca, Infanta of Portugal,
and many others."

Leo is incorrect, Kirk Douglas is NOT a Stuyvesant Descendant -- although
his son Michael, born 1944 is.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum

Illegitimatis Non Carborundum

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»