[Genealogy] Proving, Facts, and Full-Text Searching

Wed Jan 7 09:48:26 CST 2026

Need to unsubscribe? Manage here
<https://genealogytipoftheday.com/mailman/listinfo/genealogy_genealogytipoftheday.com>
.

** Proved It
** Here a Fact, There a Fact, Everywhere a Fact
** Full Text Searching 2026 Version Released

-------------
Proved It
-------------

I’ve proved it.

That’s a loaded sentence.

We don’t prove something with one just record that states what we want.

We evaluate that record. We determine how reliable that record is. We
decide who the probable informant is. We determine how reliable
that probable informant is. We need to make certain that the scribe or
clerk wrote down faithfully what the informant said.

We need to be aware of things we have assumed.

We look for all the records that may address the point we are trying to
establish. We do not limit our searches to records that are easy to access.
We research without preconceived answers directing our searches. We look at
records even if they are inconsistent or make statements with which we are
uncomfortable. We continue to look for all the records even if our
preliminary searches point in one consistent direction.

We don’t just copy down a piece of information from a record and say
“there’s our proof.”

We copy that piece of information down and say:

Here is a statement from a record. Now it is time to analyze that statement.

------------------

Here a Fact, There a Fact, Everywhere a Fact

-------------------

I struggle with terms and definitions.

In this blog post, I muse on “statements.” This is not meant to be an
edict, but rather an attempt on my part to work through terminology and
definitions in order to make my work as accurate, clear, and consistent as
possible. I’ve only reviewed this blog post twice–so there’s a chance I’ve
written something that is inconsistent.

Creating definitions is never easy. And there are situations when spending
more than a certain amount of time on definitions becomes an exercise in
herding cats.

The problem is that some words get clearly defined, discussed, and debated
and certain others get bantered around and used with nary a whit of virtual
ink spilled in an attempt to define them. My present personal frustration
is with “sources” and “information.” We will start with a general
definition and work from there.

I’ve borrowed the definition of “statement” from one used in other
disciplines. This is how one usually defines statement in a logic course or
a similar setting.

*Statement*: Something which is true or false. Statements do not contain
opinion.

“Grandma was too fat to raise all those kids,” “Grandpa should never have
had children.” “Aunt Martha should have been institutionalized.” These
items are not statements. They contain opinion.

“Kevin Sanders was born in Ohio in 1900.” “Thomas Rampley married
Christianna DeMoss in 1920.” “Susan Hendersondotter was the mother of
Henrick Svenson.” “Ronald Reagan was on the *Mayflower*.” These items are
statements–because they are true or not true.

“Ronald Reagan should have been on the *Mayflower*” is not a statement.

In math and the sciences it is easier to determine if something is a
statement and if it is true or false. Either 2+3=5 or it does not. Either
an item weighs four ounces or it does not. Oxygen is required for a certain
chemical reaction or it is not. Statements of these types are a little
easier to show than “Eric Swenson was born in Ostergotland, Sweden, in
1856.”  But it remains that either Eric was born there on that date or he
was not.

When we say that statements are true or false, we are differentiating them
from statements such as “Eric Swenson should have immigrated in 1880.”

It seems that statements for genealogical purposes should be more precise
and there should be a little more direction other than that they are “true
or false.” There still is a certain level of vagueness to our definitions
no matter how precise we may like to make them.

*Genealogical Statement*: A precise type of statement involving
individuals, relationships, or locations. A genealogical statement should
either express a single relationship (biological, legal, social, or
cultural) between individuals or indicate the existence of an individual.

A genealogical statement can *express a relationship* that exists between
(or among) two (or more) people, possibly at a certain time and possibly in
a certain geographic location. The time and location are not always
necessary, especially when expressing relationships. “Susan Smith was the
mother of Henry Smith” is such an example. Other genealogical statements
usually need a geographic location. “Thomas Jones and Susan Smith were
married in 1830 in Coshocton County, Ohio,” James Tinsley, Jonathan Fowler
and Isaac Rucker were witnesses John Rucker’s 1780 Amherst County, Virginia
deed” are all examples of genealogical statements.

A genealogical statement can also *indicate a person existed* in a certain
location at a certain point in time. “Riley Rampley lived in Hancock
County, Illinois, in 1850,” “Susan Jones lived in Chicago, Illinois,
between 1890 and 1930,” are both examples of genealogical statements.

Statements do no contain opinion but genealogists may have differing
opinions as to whether a specific statement is true or not true. That’s
where analysis comes to play.

Where do we get genealogical statements? From genealogical sources and
documents.

Genealogical sources contain words that we often vaguely call
“information.”  Information is primary or secondary, but one has to be
careful with how broadly one paints information with the primary or
secondary brush. Any one document or source can have information that is
primary and secondary. Each piece of information has to be analyzed
separately in light of it’s stated or perceived informant.

Information is either primary or secondary depending upon the perceived
knowledge of the perceived informant. It comes down to who sure the
researcher are the informant is and how sure the informant is that the
informant’s knowledge was reliable. Sometimes that is a tall order.

There’s information in a document that directly provides details from which
a statement can be constructed. There are other times where information can
be inferred from a document–that inferred information allows us to make a
statement.

*Direct statements* are those that are explicitly stated in the document,
such as when a birth certificate indicates the age of the father is
twenty-five or that his name is William Miller. Direct statements may be
either true or false–they are called direct only because of the way they
are stated on the document.

*Implied statements* are those statements that are implied by the source
and not explicitly stated. “William was at least twenty-one when he was
married in 1851” is an implied statement from the record because the record
does not mention William being under age or needing consent to marry. The
lack of such a statement that William was under twenty-one implies that he
was over twenty-one at the time of the marriage. There are other types of
implied statements contained in documents. Different genealogists may
disagree upon what statements a document implies and their reasons why they
believe the document implied those statements. That does not change our
definition of what an implied statement is.

Whether we view statements made from a document as being true or false
depends upon our analysis of those records, the perceived reliability of
the source, etc. As we research, we extract genealogical statements from
records.

After we have conducted an exhaustive search, we should have a collection
of genealogical statements (which we can classify in two ways as being
“direct” or “indirect” and “primary” or “secondary”). From those
genealogical statements have collected, we choose those we believe to be
reliable and credible ( referring to them as our “evidence”), in order to
combine them with our logic, reasoning, and analysis so that we
can construct a proof argument. And of course, we cite our sources along
the way.

What’s a “fact?” We’ll leave that to another post.

One genealogical document contains no “proof.” Genealogical documents
contain genealogical statements.

Proof is a lot more than one statement in one record.

And that’s a fact.

I think.

-----------------------------

Revised Full-Text Searching Webinar for 2026

Pre-orders over--regular price is $30--download immediate-handout included
as well as research forms
<https://michael-john-neill.dpdcart.com/cart/add?product_id=246272&method_id=268990>
.

If you ordered and did not get your link to download, please email me at
mjnrootdig at gmail.com and include your receipt number.

-----------------------------

We’re excited to offer this revised presentation on the full-text searching
at *FamilySearch*--reflecting changes made to the site since this was
recorded in August 2025. We’ve redesigned our presentation as this
functionality continues to change. And…we have an extensive handout
complete with forms to help you find more people.

If you have purchased an earlier version of this presentation--email me at
mjnrootdig at gmail.com for the code to order this revision for $10.
Fully Utilizing Full-Text Search: Revised for January 2026

Your purchase includes:

   - *A 90 minute (or more presentation)* you can view as often as you want.
   - *Detailed handout* with charts and forms to help organize your
   searches. Charts and forms sent as separate files you can edit and
   customize and not as a locked PDF you have to re-create yourself as a new
   document.

We’ll be including and discussing:

*Determining what is in Full-Text Search—*what you can access at home and
what you will have to be in a FamilySearch facility or affiliate to access.

*Seeing How AI Transcriptions are different*—they aren’t like the
transcriptions made by humans. That can change your approach.

*Remembering that Full-Text means every word*—approaches need to differ as
we aren’t looking up a name in an index any more.

*Asking Who* is in the record? We aren’t just searching for the main person
like we did with traditional indexes. We’ll discuss how to determine who
could be mentioned in a record.

*Determining How to search?* There are a variety of ways to search and
filter results. We’ll see how each one works to help determine the best
strategy.

*Creating search strategies*—how full-text search changes your approach and
why just dumping terms in search boxes is not always effective.

*Determining what you found* The interface does not always make this clear.
We will show you how to get beyond the confusion and help you get enough
detail for a citation.

*Creating effective problem-solving approaches*—what to do when you cannot
find something you want.

*Demonstrating practical examples*—completely new people and families from
our previous presentations.

Available for immediate download for $30
<https://michael-john-neill.dpdcart.com/cart/add?product_id=246272&method_id=268990>.
Complete handout included and additional forms.

-----------------------
Unsubscribing?
----------------------
*Need to unsubscribe? Do so at:*
*https://genealogytipoftheday.com/mailman/listinfo/genealogy_genealogytipoftheday.com
<https://genealogytipoftheday.com/mailman/listinfo/genealogy_genealogytipoftheday.com>*

--
-- 
------------------------------------
Michael John Neill
Genealogy Tip of the Day
http://www.genealogytipoftheday.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://genealogytipoftheday.com/pipermail/genealogy_genealogytipoftheday.com/attachments/20260107/0923f52d/attachment-0001.html>