<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>        <rss version="2.0"
             xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
             xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
             xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
             xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
             xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
             xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
        <channel>
            <title>
									Margaret Krasiowna (POL, 1654/1655?-1763) - Claims / Myths / Debunked SCs				            </title>
            <link>https://globalsupercentenarianforum.com/index.php/community/scsclaims/margaret-krasiowna-pol-1654-1655-1763/</link>
            <description>A community for fans of supercentenarians!</description>
            <language>en-US</language>
            <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2026 08:01:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
            <generator>wpForo</generator>
            <ttl>60</ttl>
							                    <item>
                        <title>Margaret Krasiowna (POL, 1654/1655?-1763)</title>
                        <link>https://globalsupercentenarianforum.com/index.php/community/scsclaims/margaret-krasiowna-pol-1654-1655-1763/#post-12434</link>
                        <pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2023 21:20:52 +0000</pubDate>
                        <description><![CDATA[Margaret Krasiowna was a woman from Poland who claimed to have been born in 1654 or 1655 and died in 1763, aged 108. Doing some research I found that if she had actually been born in the 165...]]></description>
                        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Margaret Krasiowna was a woman from Poland who claimed to have been born in 1654 or 1655 and died in 1763, aged 108. Doing some research I found that if she had actually been born in the 1650s, her youngest children would have been born to her when she was in her 90s. Case DEBUNKED!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>She was more likely born in 1704/1705 and was 58 when she died, NOT 108. This would make total sense as she would have been 49 when she had her last child. Still unusual to have a child at 49, but not impossible. </p>]]></content:encoded>
						                            <category domain="https://globalsupercentenarianforum.com/index.php/community/scsclaims/">Claims / Myths / Debunked SCs</category>                        <dc:creator>AQ</dc:creator>
                        <guid isPermaLink="true">https://globalsupercentenarianforum.com/index.php/community/scsclaims/margaret-krasiowna-pol-1654-1655-1763/#post-12434</guid>
                    </item>
							        </channel>
        </rss>
		