Um, I think Mr. Me was also having jest with us. Otherwise, there’s a built-in impossibility in his statement: he says he doesn’t believe in ghosts, but there is a body that can prove they are real. It’s impossible to not believe in the existence of something and also concede that they can be proven to exist. I took his post to be a sideways jab at the Church, in that they can assert anything is true and to them, it automatically makes it so.
I don’t know what you were trying to achieve here. Maybe you accomplished it, maybe you didn’t. But if you want to find honest answers, it might be better not to lie in your questions.
Oh, I didn’t mean that specifically to ghosts - I don’t believe in them either. However, in his first posts, CC stated that ghosts, angels, ET visitors, and God didn’t exist because he decided what some see as proof wasn’t.
Point taken, but I still maintain that there are cases in which absence of proof (or absence of accepted proof) is not proof of absence.
In regards to the OP, I think Goose pretty well covered it. Even if the Records Office of GB did validate it in the 18th century, I hardly think that the accounts of a half dozen soldiers would really hold up any more.