Genealogy research could become addictive

[Detroitpete]

Ancestry.com has definately been a help for me, and now I'm looking for a Mac compatable gen software package. I have 3 generations that have more then 10 children per generation, so having a place to map everything would really be helpful.

Genweb and Ancestry have been very valuable in checking my records against others.

Derek--it IS kind of daunting when first begining, but its like what they say about eating an elephant--one bite at a time. I'm no where near where I know I could be in my family research, but I'm just finding one fact/individual and going to the next.

My family had a family genealogy published in 1926 that has in some ways been very helpful, yet the 'seeds' of our family prior to coming to America had always been no more than a guess.

After just 2 months interacting on gen-web sites I found the pre-cursor to the first in our family here AND found out he was from Scotland when our book surmised his family came from Sweden.

Problem is...add this to my kilt addiction and then add my highland games insanity and well, too darn bad I have to spend at least a few hours each day at work ;-)

[gilmore]

The pedigrees and group sheets on ancestry.com and the other online sites are very convenient, but when you rely on them, you are relying often on other people's work that we really don't know the integrity of (especially the LDS site.)

It has always been the case in genealogical research that bad information is passed around, but with the coming of the internet this process happens a lot faster. It really is heart breaking when you see an entire wing of your genealogical edifice come tumbling down because it was based on a foundation of incorrect assertions regarding more recent (or even more ancient) events. After it happens a few times, it become merely irritating, and one kicks oneself for taking shortcuts and not assessing information more stringently.

I have a cousin who says he never accepts anything as a fact until he can hold the original document that supports it in his hands. I think that's a very good rule of thumb.

[Derek Conley]

Derek--it IS kind of daunting when first begining, but its like what they say about eating an elephant--one bite at a time. I'm no where near where I know I could be in my family research, but I'm just finding one fact/individual and going to the next.

I'm sure I'll just take a deep breath and take the plunge here soon...

[SteveB]

The genealogy addiction started many years ago for me. The kilt addiction is relatively new. My Family tree occupies four four drawer file cabinets with copies of documents for each of the 18,421 records in my database. Without verification, the data could be a mere bit of the wishful thinking of the author of the source you have entered. Around the beginning of the twentieth century everybody was publishing a family genealogy purporting to go all the way back to famous, or royal lines. Most of these "brag books" were very wishful thinking that could not be really feasible biologically. They serve as nice guide, but should be verified with primary records as much as as is possible. Mine started before the personal computer became available. The internet does speed up the process, as well as speed the spread of some questionable data.
Slainte

[Scotus]

Yes, genealogy is very addictive. I was active in the hobby for a long time before I gave it up, due to the fact that it's also a somewhat anti-social hobby. If you're doing genealogy correctly, you'll spend lots of time in darkened rooms of libraries (known as the genealogical section) , as well as tramping through cemeteries. It has been rewarding, but there was a point where I had to say, "Enough is enough." I had to get outside, breath the fresh air, and talk to living humans.

Gilmore is correct. Do not go by what you find on the Internet. You can use it as a guide, but not source material. You have to do the leg work on your own to be certain. Take nothing as fact until you have a real document or other secondary or tertiary source (well documented book that lists primary sources, for example) to prove something.