Try and convince me- I'm undecided!

[LisaDavidson]

Regardless of one's opinion of Anna Anderson, Peter Kurth has long been a friend of the Alexander Palace website and this Forum. Many of us became interested in the Palace and Imperial Family due to her story. And, in finding out about AA, an excellent place to start is his book.

It's one thing to think poorly of her as a person and another to disregard the hard work that Kurth put into his book. He did considerable research, and even if you disagree with his conclusions, it is nonetheless research.

There was considerable research directed in proving Cold Fusion. Subsequently it was shown that all those efforts were shown to be creative science without scientific merit. International scientists debunked that notion, while the investigators were left standing with egg on their faces. Plainly, the research no matter how fervent was proven to be worthless. The outcome being that all the years involved in reaching the point of publication become irrelevant.

There are other many research projects that have created sensation and controversy in the public domain. Not all are worthy of continuing public attention, and can be best seen as a historic curiosity.

Margarita

So, is your point that this new poster should simply accept what she is being told by members here without attempting to read up on the subject herself and make up her own mind? I'm willing to give her credit for being intelligent enough to read a few books. It won't take too long for her to discover that prior to DNA testing, many people believed AA, including Princess Xenia of Russia. And, upon DNA testing, the evidence is overwhelming that she was not Anastasia.

I agree that if she reads Kurth, she needs to bear the above in mind. But, are you saying that Peter's work does not deserve respect because DNA testing later disproved AA was Anastasia? I think AA's story is still an interesting one, no matter who she was.

I just think it's important that we treat everyone with respect, no matter what their ideas or beliefs. And, I also think that it's important to make up one's own mind. 

In other words, read about it, wherever you choose to read about it and make up your own mind.

[Bev]

No sarcasm at all.  I thought that by "friend" you meant financial supporter - "a freinds of the arts" type of designation. which we get when we make our donations to the art museum and symphony.  I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings about friend Kurth. 

However, I still would not recommend his book - his research seems to have been to stenograph those court papers that he thought favoured his subject and then presenting their conclusions they've based on nazi junk science that has been completely and absolutely discredited.  I agree with Margarita, that books like this come and go all the time but if they're not contributing to the project and are in fact, promoting false information with wrong conclusions, then it might be wiser to recommend up to date books and then read books like Kurth's or Summers and Mangold.  Build a foundation and then add on...

[Belochka]

Regardless of one's opinion of Anna Anderson, Peter Kurth has long been a friend of the Alexander Palace website and this Forum. Many of us became interested in the Palace and Imperial Family due to her story. And, in finding out about AA, an excellent place to start is his book.

It's one thing to think poorly of her as a person and another to disregard the hard work that Kurth put into his book. He did considerable research, and even if you disagree with his conclusions, it is nonetheless research.

There was considerable research directed in proving Cold Fusion. Subsequently it was shown that all those efforts were shown to be creative science without scientific merit. International scientists debunked that notion, while the investigators were left standing with egg on their faces. Plainly, the research no matter how fervent was proven to be worthless. The outcome being that all the years involved in reaching the point of publication become irrelevant.

There are other many research projects that have created sensation and controversy in the public domain. Not all are worthy of continuing public attention, and can be best seen as a historic curiosity.

Margarita

So, is your point that this new poster should simply accept what she is being told by members here without attempting to read up on the subject herself and make up her own mind? I'm willing to give her credit for being intelligent enough to read a few books. It won't take too long for her to discover that prior to DNA testing, many people believed AA, including Princess Xenia of Russia. And, upon DNA testing, the evidence is overwhelming that she was not Anastasia.

I agree that if she reads Kurth, she needs to bear the above in mind. But, are you saying that Peter's work does not deserve respect because DNA testing later disproved AA was Anastasia? I think AA's story is still an interesting one, no matter who she was.

I just think it's important that we treat everyone with respect, no matter what their ideas or beliefs. And, I also think that it's important to make up one's own mind. 

Just because AA turned out not to be Anastasia

With respect, why should there be respect for a body of research that only leads the reader to its singular sensational conclusion ... a conclusion that has been invalidated by impartial scientific analysis?

As for the author, there is no issue.

Margarita

[Annie]

No sarcasm at all.  I thought that by "friend" you meant financial supporter - "a freinds of the arts" type of designation. which we get when we make our donations to the art museum and symphony.  I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings about friend Kurth. 

I thought so too, "friend" is used by many organizations for benefactors.

However, I still would not recommend his book - his research seems to have been to stenograph those court papers that he thought favoured his subject and then presenting their conclusions they've based on nazi junk science that has been completely and absolutely discredited.  I agree with Margarita, that books like this come and go all the time but if they're not contributing to the project and are in fact, promoting false information with wrong conclusions, then it might be wiser to recommend up to date books and then read books like Kurth's or Summers and Mangold.  Build a foundation and then add on...

This is true, he does seem to only pick and choose the parts that suit his case, and some of those who did the facial, ear and handwriting comparsions were Nazis and their methods have since been discredited. While the story he tells is indeed interesting, if it's not the whole story, or completely true, it does mislead those who are just getting into the subject and wanting to learn, and I fear it would lay a groundwork in them that would give them an unfair belief in AA. Unfortunately, there is no book discounting her claim, so there is no other side to read for balance. It's been very hard to counter claims in his book with logic and deduction to explain things away now that the DNA has proven her false, because people feel that if they can quote a page in Kurth's book, that is a more valid source. Most of the people who come here asking have already read his book, and it has slanted them to the pro AA side, and it's hard to get them to stop believing it.

Here's an article that tells another side:

http://www.serfes.org/royal/annaanderson.htm

And then, there's the DNA. No one has yet to give us a valid reason why the DNA should not be believed, so why isn't it?

[Lemur]

What are the reasons some people don't believe the DNA? Is it only conspiracy theories about switching? The true science is all there.

[Forum Admin]

There are really only two "schools" of doubt of the DNA.

The first simply don't trust the realiability of the testing.  They grasp strongly on to any possibility of a mis-type of the sequencing.  The staggering probability of error being about one in a million is just not enough to convince them.  These people pretty much do not really understand the fundementals of mtDNA technology.

The second group are the "conspiracy theorists" who dance feverishly around to show the "possibility" of a switch of the sample.  These people understand even less about the science and real world handling of the material in question.  They shout about the "possibility" of a switch, but don't really address the PLAUSIBILITY of a switch.  One has to ask fundemental questions about any alleged switch:
WHO had a motive in the first place?
WHAT was their reason for motivation?
WHO knew the sample was IN Martha Jefferson Hospital, when the hospital itself couldn't find it easily?
WHO had access to Martha Jefferson Hospital?
WHO and HOW did the perpatrator know that when the "allegedly genuine"  AA sample was sequenced it would NOT MATCH Karl Maucher and would match Queen Victoria's mtDNA?? It is critical to remember that THIS testing was the very first time mtDNA was used to identify or exclude a family relationship. It had NEVER been done before the AA sample.
WHO had the skill to extract a matching sample from Karl Maucher?
WHY would Karl M. give up a piece of his intestine?
HOW did they exactly make the switch undiscovered?
WHERE did they get the money to do all this??

[helenazar]

What are the reasons some people don't believe the DNA? Is it only conspiracy theories about switching?

Pretty much, Lemur. There were also some rantings from Kurth, et al, about the DNA science from last decade no longer being valid today, but that's all nonsense of course. So yes, the only thing that can be used to challenge the DNA are consiparacy theories: intestine switching, and other such antics...

[Lemur]

Thanks for your posts. That's all very sad and even disturbing. I don't understand why some people refuse to give this up.

[helenazar]

Thanks for your posts. That's all very sad and even disturbing. I don't understand why some people refuse to give this up.

Read some of the old Anna Anderson threads - you will be even more saddened and disturbed! This is why most of us now try to avoid posting here like the plague...   

[Eddie_uk]

Thanks for your posts. That's all very sad and even disturbing. I don't understand why some people refuse to give this up.

I know I know, very sad

Although the best one was when Queen Elizabeth II was apparently behind the intestine switch!!! To funny 

[Suzie]

And please don't blame that awful cartoon on Disney! It was not Disney, it was 20th Century Fox.
Suzie

[komarov]

And please don't blame that awful cartoon on Disney! It was not Disney, it was 20th Century Fox.
Suzie

You know, I kinda gave up trying to tell people that.  If you ever want to search for something about that movie, you'll find what you're looking for a lot easier if you put "disney" in the search with it.

[stepan]

No sarcasm at all.  I thought that by "friend" you meant financial supporter - "a freinds of the arts" type of designation. which we get when we make our donations to the art museum and symphony.  I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings about friend Kurth. 

I thought so too, "friend" is used by many organizations for benefactors.

However, I still would not recommend his book - his research seems to have been to stenograph those court papers that he thought favoured his subject and then presenting their conclusions they've based on nazi junk science that has been completely and absolutely discredited.  I agree with Margarita, that books like this come and go all the time but if they're not contributing to the project and are in fact, promoting false information with wrong conclusions, then it might be wiser to recommend up to date books and then read books like Kurth's or Summers and Mangold.  Build a foundation and then add on...

This is true, he does seem to only pick and choose the parts that suit his case, and some of those who did the facial, ear and handwriting comparsions were Nazis and their methods have since been discredited. While the story he tells is indeed interesting, if it's not the whole story, or completely true, it does mislead those who are just getting into the subject and wanting to learn, and I fear it would lay a groundwork in them that would give them an unfair belief in AA. Unfortunately, there is no book discounting her claim, so there is no other side to read for balance. It's been very hard to counter claims in his book with logic and deduction to explain things away now that the DNA has proven her false, because people feel that if they can quote a page in Kurth's book, that is a more valid source. Most of the people who come here asking have already read his book, and it has slanted them to the pro AA side, and it's hard to get them to stop believing it.

Here's an article that tells another side:

http://www.serfes.org/royal/annaanderson.htm

And then, there's the DNA. No one has yet to give us a valid reason why the DNA should not be believed, so why isn't it?

There is a book opposing her claim : The Quest for Anastasia by John Klier and Helen Mingay. It´s  interesting even if they can´t explain everything. They wrote that :"Felix´s daughter has told reporters that her father talked about his sister Franziska with pride,saying that she got away and made a new and successful life for herself as Anna Anderson".  So it seems at least some members of the Schanzkowski family believe that AA was Franziska.

[Annie]

Thanks Stepan, you always bring in interesting info. Personally I believe all of the Schanskowska family believed AA was FS but denied her for her own good to keep her out of trouble for filing a false claim  and let her keep her "career" as "Anastasia." It would have done no good to expose her, only pain, money, and humiliation for all of them!

[AGRBear]

.....[in part]....
There is a book opposing her claim : The Quest for Anastasia by John Klier and Helen Mingay. It´s  interesting even if they can´t explain everything. They wrote that :"Felix´s daughter has told reporters that her father talked about his sister Franziska with pride,saying that she got away and made a new and successful life for herself as Anna Anderson".  So it seems at least some members of the Schanzkowski family believe that AA was Franziska.

 I have heard about the report that Felix's daughters told reporters these things.   Does anyone have a name of any of the reporters?    If not, is there an  article from a  newspaper of that time in which Felix daughter was quoted?  Perhaps the book by Kleir and Mingay mention their source.  If so,  can you tell us what it is?

Thanks.

AGRBear