And it has been proven . . .
The facts sometimes speak for themselves, but not always.
Someone took the trouble to find the 16th great niece of Richard III, living in Canada, and now having no connection with royalty apart from DNA. With this information—that she was, assuredly, part of the royal line of England–it was possible to prove that those bones in the parking lot, having the same DNA, were also at the very least in that particular royal line. With that info plus historical documents it was possible to prove that Richard the Third lay in a British “car park” all those years.
The DNA test did NOT prove he was Richard.
The DNA test WAS USED TO PROVE he was.
That is a distinction.
So it turns out he was not a hunchback. He DID have scoliosis.
Pretty soon the articles popped up saying that since DNA had proved he wasn’t a hunchback (no, not quite) maybe he wasn’t a monster, either.
Good ol’ DNA can even prove personality traits. Not.
Why do I even care? Cuz it has to do with my livelihood, my calling. I’m a librarian and my job is information. Accurate information. I really hate it when people make decisions based on inaccuracies. Disasters usually result. And people get hurt.
But more on that later.