Anna Anderson's claim to be Grand Duchess Anastasia

[Anna was Franziska]

[quote=ChatNoir;797705]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

She would still have remembered a toe that bent over in the middle and formed a bunion.

Perhaps she didn't have 'bunions' until she stood all that time on her feet at the factories where she worked.

The shoe size was given by FS's mother to Frau Rathlef Keilmann's private detective.

I still remember this being told elsewhere, maybe even by you, as a stepmother who never knew her well, do you have a passage from the book? Why do you trust her PI and think Ernie's was crooked?

But also, shoe size proves nothing because people get it wrong and don't always know and feet change size and shoes run large or small. The shoes are silly beside the DNA.

We won't really know until her birth certificate is found.

Well stop hiding it!

No really it may never have existed, not all births are recorded (My Aunt Mae, born in 1924 in North Carolina, is a perfect example, the only sibling of 12 not to have one) but that doesn't mean at all she's not family. Again, it's an insult to the scientists involved to think they'd be too stupid to check it out.

[ChatNoir]

[quote=Anna was Franziska;797716]

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

Perhaps she didn't have 'bunions' until she stood all that time on her feet at the factories where she worked.

According to some of the medical reports it was so pronounced it had to have been present from birth.

I still remember this being told elsewhere, maybe even by you, as a stepmother who never knew her well, do you have a passage from the book? Why do you trust her PI and think Ernie's was crooked?

I am at work (!) without my books. I have found no inconsistensies in Frau Rathlef Keilmann's detective's work, but a lot in Martin Knopf's.

But also, shoe size proves nothing because people get it wrong and don't always know and feet change size and shoes run large or small. The shoes are silly beside the DNA.

Shoe size does not make or break the case, but it is there, no matter how much you try to downplay it.

No really it may never have existed, not all births are recorded (My Aunt Mae, born in 1924 in North Carolina, is a perfect example, the only sibling of 12 not to have one) but that doesn't mean at all she's not family. Again, it's an insult to the scientists involved to think they'd be too stupid to check it out.

I think it was filmmaker Knott who tracked down Carl Maucher.

[Anna was Franziska]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I've been saying for a while that talking to the Anna Anderson apologists is like dealing with creationists, and I see that quote-mining is another similarity.

I've been frustrated, in real life even, by people who insist the world is only 6,000 years old and that any scientific data proving things older is either wrong or 'the devil making you think that.' I heard one man rant on about how carbon dating was 'nothing' and didn't mean anything and if you believed in it you were going to hell. I also saw a mother tell a crying child in a public library that he couldn't check out a book on dinosaurs because the book 'lied' and about the Bible and was therefore evil. Even things carbon dated in the Holy Land are denied to be more than 6,000 by these people. Are they really that backward and uninformed or are they really convinced hell awaits if they believe otherwise? The strange thing is I don't think the Bible ever even says anything about 6,000 years, it's just an estimate somebody came up with allegedly tracing back the 'begats' and estimating the generations.

You know, throughout this discussion, you've been awfully fond of stating things as hard fact that aren't.

Yes very true, and very frustrating

I just don't like the implication of incompetence, dishonesty, or both on the part of the scientists, especially since there's no evidence for it.

It's awful the allegations and insinuations brought against the scientists, as well as Martha Jefferson Hospital, the Queen, and now even Putin, with NO evidence at all other than the wishful thinking to hold out hope AA could still be AN. It's really wrong. Ironically, I have been repeatedly accused of 'slandering' Gleb Botkin for suggesting he helped her with her 'memories' by these same people.

[AGRBear]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

...[in part]...
All this is useless speculation, there is no proof Maucher is not related to FS, and the scientists were sure of this and used him for a sample donor.

Once, again, you are making incorrect assumptions. Here is what Dr. Ginther wrote to Curious One.

>>You also asked about the relationship of Gertrude to Margarete Ellerick. I never wanted to know any more than necessary about any sample because I feared that knowledge might prejudice my result. I do not remember being told anything about Margarete’s family.

I hope this answers your questions.<<

AGRBear

[Anna was Franziska]

Dr. Ginter was not one of the scientists hired or enlisted to do the testing. What he did was an additional test at another time. Did anyone ever ask Gill, Stoneking or Melton?

The biggest question remains is, IF HE'S NOT RELATED WHY DID HIS DNA MATCH? What point do you mean to make here? Please explain.

[ChatNoir]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

It's awful the allegations and insinuations brought against the scientists, as well as Martha Jefferson Hospital, the Queen, and now even Putin, with NO evidence at all other than the wishful thinking to hold out hope AA could still be AN. It's really wrong. Ironically, I have been repeatedly accused of 'slandering' Gleb Botkin for suggesting he helped her with her 'memories' by these same people.

Such noble words coming from someone who calls Professor Otto Reche "a discredited Nazi".

[Anna was Franziska]

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

Such noble words coming from someone who calls Professor Otto Reche "a discredited Nazi".

Well, he was a Nazi and he was discredited by his peers...

This is a commentary by someone who did extensive research on Reche and his work:
(I must) point out the scientific fallacies upon which your claims and evidence are based. Otto Reche is a good example of this - here we have a nazi by choice and inclination, whose work was so bad that persons such as Robert Procter, Hermann Graml, Edith Zerbin- Rudin, Stephen Gould and Robert Leakey have discredited it. I explained why in more than one post, as I explained why anthromorphic photo comparison is a subjective science with a narrow degree of scientific certainty, no matter how many graphs, charts and measurements he might have had. It doesn't matter how many graphs and measurements he had, if the foundation has been taken away, does it? Advances in the science of mtdna recovery alone, has proven that his foundational base, his sampling of "long headed Europeans" is false. among other factors such as age, the His photographic "proof" is also false - photo comparison cannot account for the thickness of muscle, fat, skin or bone,among other factors such as age,mechanics of photography and printing and other variables involved in photographic comparison.

There were several of these Nazi anthropologists who were revered at the time, but now criticized. On the history channel they tell of a team of them who traveled to Tibet in the 1930's and 'proved' by facial life masks that the Tibetians were really descendants of aryan Germans from the Rhine Valley. This was one of Hitler's pet theories, however, it is now known to be false. So these Nazis were not as respectable, reliable and accurate as Anderson supporters will have you believe. Therefore, doubt is cast on their 'identification' of Anna Anderson being an 'identical twin' of Anastasia.

[ChatNoir]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Well, he was a Nazi and he was discredited by his peers...

This is a commentary by someone who did extensive research on Reche and his work:
(I must) point out the scientific fallacies upon which your claims and evidence are based. Otto Reche is a good example of this - here we have a nazi by choice and inclination, whose work was so bad that persons such as Robert Procter, Hermann Graml, Edith Zerbin- Rudin, Stephen Gould and Robert Leakey have discredited it. I explained why in more than one post, as I explained why anthromorphic photo comparison is a subjective science with a narrow degree of scientific certainty, no matter how many graphs, charts and measurements he might have had. It doesn't matter how many graphs and measurements he had, if the foundation has been taken away, does it? Advances in the science of mtdna recovery alone, has proven that his foundational base, his sampling of "long headed Europeans" is false. among other factors such as age, the His photographic "proof" is also false - photo comparison cannot account for the thickness of muscle, fat, skin or bone,among other factors such as age,mechanics of photography and printing and other variables involved in photographic comparison.

There were several of these Nazi anthropologists who were revered at the time, but now criticized. On the history channel they tell of a team of them who traveled to Tibet in the 1930's and 'proved' by facial life masks that the Tibetians were really descendants of aryan Germans from the Rhine Valley. This was one of Hitler's pet theories, however, it is now known to be false. So these Nazis were not as respectable, reliable and accurate as Anderson supporters will have you believe. Therefore, doubt is cast on their 'identification' of Anna Anderson being an 'identical twin' of Anastasia.

Wouldn't it be awfully nice if you could name your sources.

[COUNTESS]

Otto Reche was a Nazi and promolgated the theory that Blood Types were A, B and O and each was assigned to Europeans, Asians or Native Americans, but was mongrelized due to intermarriage. He was a great promoter of the Ayran race nonsense. He was arrested by the Americans after the war and spent 16 months in prison. If you would like to see some of his collegues writings about him, try When Medicine went Mad: BioEthics and the Holocaust by Arthur Caplan or From Racism to Genocide: Anthropology of the Third Reich, by Gretchen Schafft. Sorry, Reche represented a very dark side of Germany.

[AGRBear]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Dr. Ginter was not one of the scientists hired or enlisted to do the testing. What he did was an additional test at another time. ...[in part]...

The two samples were sent by the court to two different labs. One was Dr. Gill and the other was Dr. King of Berkeley who turned the testing over to Dr. Ginther, who did the same testing as Dr. Gill. Because Dr. Gill completed his testing first and published what he found first, Dr. King never published Dr. Ginther's results. She had turned her attention to breast cancer and lost interest in the tests Ginther had done. Later, Ginther acquired permission from Dr. King and continued other tests involving AA, Maucher, Margaret, etc. ....

Massie's book, The Final Chapter goes into more detail about the other tests. Dr. Ginther letter about all of this is on my forum, which you have read, since we've talked about this on AP and other forums. I assume you've forgotten these details.

I'm not near my book at the moment but will return with the page and the quote when I have a moment to do so.

AGRBear

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by AGRBear

The two samples were sent by the court to two different labs. One was Dr. Gill and the other was Dr. King of Berkeley who turned the testing over to Dr. Ginther, who did the same testing as Dr. Gill. Because Dr. Gill completed his testing first and published what he found first, Dr. King never published Dr. Ginther's results. She had turned her attention to breast cancer and lost interest in the tests Ginther had done. Later, Ginther acquired permission from Dr. King and continued other tests involving AA, Maucher, Margaret, etc. ....

Massie's book, The Final Chapter goes into more detail about the other tests. Dr. Ginther letter about all of this is on my forum, which you have read, since we've talked about this on AP and other forums. I assume you've forgotten these details.

I'm not near my book at the moment but will return with the page and the quote when I have a moment to do so.

AGRBear

Where did Dr King say this?

[AGRBear]

I didn't quote Dr. King. So, I'm not sure what you're asking me, Elspeth.

AGRBear

[ChatNoir]

Originally Posted by COUNTESS

Otto Reche was a Nazi and promolgated the theory that Blood Types were A, B and O and each was assigned to Europeans, Asians or Native Americans, but was mongrelized due to intermarriage. He was a great promoter of the Ayran race nonsense. He was arrested by the Americans after the war and spent 16 months in prison. If you would like to see some of his collegues writings about him, try When Medicine went Mad: BioEthics and the Holocaust by Arthur Caplan or From Racism to Genocide: Anthropology of the Third Reich, by Gretchen Schafft. Sorry, Reche represented a very dark side of Germany.

And still he was chosen by the Hamburg court as their anthropological expert.

[AGRBear]

Found one of my old posts on AP which gives us the page in Massie's book where he talks about Ginther and Remy.

>>When looking for information, I had to read a few pages of Massie's THE ROMANOVS, THE FINAL CHAPTER.

In it, Massie tells us that Remy was looking for possible samples that would produce DNA p. 234:

Remy found a Professor Stefan Sadkuhler, who is is said, examined AA on 6 June 1951. He had drawn blood to see if AA was a carrier of hemophila... Sadkuhler gave Remy the slide which Remy broke in half. He sent one piece to Professor Herrmann and the other to Dr. Ginther. Apparently Herrmann was able to get some DNA and sent it to Ginther. And this is what Massie wrote and I quote:
"Ginther found that this DNA did not match the Hessian profile (that is, the doner of the blood was not related to Empress Alexandra), nor did it match the Schanzkowski profile as dervied from Margareth Ellerick." Then Massie talks about possible contamination, etc. etc..<<

Margareth Ellerick was Gertrude's daughter.

Within a few pages surrounding p. 234, Massie talks about Drs. King's and Ginther's role in all of this. Perhaps this is what you wanted to know Elspeth.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by AGRBear

I didn't quote Dr. King. So, I'm not sure what you're asking me, Elspeth.

AGRBear

I'm asking how you know that the King-Ginther work wasn't published because of the prior publication of the Gill work. As opposed to not being published for some other reason.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by AGRBear

Found one of my old posts on AP which gives us the page in Massie's book where he talks about Ginther and Remy.

>>When looking for information, I had to read a few pages of Massie's THE ROMANOVS, THE FINAL CHAPTER.

In it, Massie tells us that Remy was looking for possible samples that would produce DNA p. 234:

Remy found a Professor Stefan Sadkuhler, who is is said, examined AA on 6 June 1951. He had drawn blood to see if AA was a carrier of hemophila... Sadkuhler gave Remy the slide which Remy broke in half. He sent one piece to Professor Herrmann and the other to Dr. Ginther. Apparently Herrmann was able to get some DNA and sent it to Ginther. And this is what Massie wrote and I quote:
"Ginther found that this DNA did not match the Hessian profile (that is, the doner of the blood was not related to Empress Alexandra), nor did it match the Schanzkowski profile as dervied from Margareth Ellerick." Then Massie talks about possible contamination, etc. etc..<<

Margareth Ellerick was Gertrude's daughter.

Within a few pages surrounding p. 234, Massie talks about Drs. King's and Ginther's role in all of this. Perhaps this is what you wanted to know Elspeth.

He broke the slide in half? This wasn't a scientist working in a clean-room, right? This was a journalist or something? Lord, no wonder that sample was contaminated beyond repair.

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

It's a fact he signed it, this does not automatically make what he said in it a fact. The fact that he signed it is evidence for consideration with everything else on both sides.

No a brother wouldn't know all, and probably had not seen his sister's bare arms and legs(or even feet) since they were children playing in the creek.

I don't think there was a creek in Borowihlas ...

(Sorry not sure of the spelling!)

[ferrymansdaughter]

[quote=Anna was Franziska;797716]

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

No really it may never have existed, not all births are recorded (My Aunt Mae, born in 1924 in North Carolina, is a perfect example, the only sibling of 12 not to have one) but that doesn't mean at all she's not family. .

I find this interesting? Wasn't it a legal requirement? In the UK you've had a legal requirement to register your child's birth since about 1850 with the penalty of a fine if you didn't.

Or does it depend on the state?

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

Well, he was a Nazi and he was discredited by his peers...

This is a commentary by someone who did extensive research on Reche and his work:
(.

Who is the someone and why did they do extensive research - is it another anthropologist?

[ferrymansdaughter]

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

Also, FS was NOT working alone in this area. There were other workers around her and the man who died. .

Originally Posted by Anna was Franziska

While we may assume so we really don't know for sure. .

It’s a munitions factory, in the middle of a war. I don’t think we are “assuming” when we say that they would not have been the only two people there. It would have been something like this -

http://firstworldwar.com/photos/grap...onsfact_01.jpg

picture taken from
GWS - The Great War: The Standard History of the All Europe Conflict (volume four) edited by H. W. Wilson and J. A. Hammerton (Amalgamated Press, London 1915)