Cannot understand the theorists position. All anyone is asking for is proof. That is a reasonable thing given that theory requires unsupported assumptions. There are some names and dates that are factual material but they only can be tied together with assumptions.

It is unreasonable to expect anyone who has different information to accept what probably appears much stronger to you because it yours, than it does to those who see a different outcome to Evan, Sr.'s life. If you had proof you were right and were challenged, then I would expect to have to prove you wrong. Regardless of your claim about Mathews, logical thinking said he had so much information at his finger tips and was known as meticulous and thorough, it's 99% certain he's correct. Even if he weren't there is virtually no reason or proof to think Evan, Sr. went to VA. Asking you for proof is not an unreasonable thing. It's standard genealogical practice. What is unreasonable is for you to push for proof from those who disagree. We don't need need to proof you wrong. You need to prove yourselves right.


It looks to me as though you think what you put together is stronger than, Mathews statement and our analysis that since the church makes no mention of junior, it's senior. It isn't, because there is no proof that the Evans and Anns are the same, the children and marks are different, and on and on. Under no circumstances existing here is it not your responsibily to prove your theory. At this point it is not necessary for us to prove anything........


I think it worth repeating you are not arbiter of fact. That said there is little fact in your theory aside for the death of Londoun Evan 1757. Even his will can be interpreted multiple ways regarding Jonas, who sold horses, if he ever lived in PA and how long he had lived in Londoun.