You have this woman b 1583. Her son is given a birth date of 1648.
Does this not flag some kind of paradox alarm anywhere?
As far as I can see there are only three dates that have any bearing on this woman. Her marriage date 1645 - look it up on the IGI, that can't be too difficult. The birth date given in Fasti for her son George of 1676. And the statement that her husband had married before 1678 for the 2nd time.
So a bit of common sense would give an ESTIMATE only of 1628 - 1630. Sorry, common sense is a bit like Great Britain these days.
1583 - I'm amazed!
I'm glad someone has responded to something I'm saying.
Sources for this problem are not terribly relevant, logic and some basic biology.
Though If you look at my own answer to her husband's stuff you'll see some additional data. This will give flexibility for Janet's birth date, but hardly within a few years of her husband's grandfather. Er supposed grandfather cos I don't see anything that makes Alexr P son of Eliz SINCLAIR.
No, I'm not related - except in the most distant of ways - but I have very wide ranging interests.
Geni may well be supposed to be collaborative. But that's a recipe for disaster. Knowledge is not democratic - one correct person out-votes everything.
'Collaboration' responds to mass decision.