How Professional Researchers Evaluate Historical Claims

By Randy Salars

Professional researchers don't accept or reject claims based on whether they "sound right." They apply a systematic evaluation framework that tests claims against available evidence, assesses source reliability, and quantifies confidence levels.


The Four-Question Framework

1. Is the claim specific enough to test?

Vague claims ("there's gold somewhere in the mountains") cannot be verified. Specific claims ("a payroll wagon was lost crossing Miller Creek in October 1864") can be investigated.

2. Does contemporary evidence exist?

Were documents, news reports, or records created at or near the time of the claimed event? The absence of contemporary evidence doesn't disprove a claim, but it weakens it significantly.

3. Do independent sources converge?

One source is a lead. Two independent sources pointing to the same conclusion constitute evidence. Three or more constitute strong evidence.

4. What does contradicting evidence suggest?

Professional researchers actively seek evidence that contradicts their hypothesis. Ignoring contradicting evidence is the hallmark of amateur research.


Confidence Levels

Professional researchers assign confidence levels to their conclusions rather than claiming certainty:

LevelMeaningEvidence Required
EstablishedSupported by multiple independent sources3+ convergent sources
ProbableSupported by credible evidence, minor gaps2+ sources with corroboration
PossiblePlausible but not yet verified1 credible source, no contradictions
SpeculativeInteresting but unverifiedNo primary sources, secondary only

Apply This Framework to Treasure Research

The Treasure Hunter's Research Guide teaches this evaluation methodology as a practical, step-by-step system for assessing treasure legends and historical claims.

Get the Research Guide โ†’

Related Pages

Treasure Research Intelligence

Research methodology, evidence analysis, and historical evaluation techniques.

We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe at any time.