It's not you, the ESO does not have a section about unvalidated claims, or debunked claims. We do log cases internally though, so we are keeping track of them. However if people think they would find this helpful then this is something that we could consider adding.

For debunked cases, at the moment we do not have a section because we have not processed any of these cases. This is just because we have been focussing on validating the genuine supercentenarians first. However there are a few cases that would appear to have enough evidence to disprove (including some GRG-accepted cases).

Posted by: @andrew

It's not you, the ESO does not have a section about unvalidated claims, or debunked claims. We do log cases internally though, so we are keeping track of them. However if people think they would find this helpful then this is something that we could consider adding.

For debunked cases, at the moment we do not have a section because we have not processed any of these cases. This is just because we have been focussing on validating the genuine supercentenarians first. However there are a few cases that would appear to have enough evidence to disprove (including some GRG-accepted cases).

I would find it helpful to know, at least for historical cases, what supercentenarian cases the ESO is aware of but haven't validated.

I'm also curious which GRG cases you've disproven, but that might be something more suitable for a private email conversation.