I do get it Scrat. I just disagree with your conclusion. No need for attack. It is about truth. I just don’t see one NYT article as being the end all of the conversation. Even in your own post you list:
William Lundy (January 18, 1848?-September 1, 1957) of Alabama/Florida.
Even he would have lived longer than Woolson, but you still say Woolson is the oldest. Perhaps you posted something to refute that, I didn’t see it. Your sole "evidence" about Walter Williams is some New York Times smear-atorial. You seek to slander the gentleman from the South based on that article. Southern records were often not kept so well, particularly after the war. Perhaps neither is the oldest. Perhaps you will claim to be the oldest. (joking, don’t be up tight) Perhaps we will never know. I am only attempting to present the side of the coin that you choose to ignore.
Water-man, my apologies if I have offended you in some way. I guess my "attitude" is due to an attack on a man that history has honored. A man who is not here to defend himself. One who was paid homage by some of America’s greatest men and institutions.
I have the utmost respect for Scrat's opines almost anywhere else on the board. We have one issue. Don't make to much of that. Perhaps in the end, we can only agree to disagree. I respect both your opinions, I just disagree. All research I have seen shows Williams’ birth year to be 1842. I’m not sure what “evidence” the Times reported, but they have a long up hill march to overcome all the others who found Williams to be authentic. That is the only point I am making.
Indeed, my opinion may be biased. But I did have ancestors who fought on both sides. I do tend to hold in highest esteem those gallant men in gray while making no disrespect for those who fought for the north. I have seen both sides of the argument. Perhaps you can show the same respect for my opinion as I will for yours, even if you disagree.
I make no apology for not going along with revisionist history. At least not based on the New York Times.