This is where I think you are confusing the facts and ignoring the historical record that is before you. The record shows that the John Looney (Yack) who died in December 1835 was 87 years old, b. abt 1748. This is definitely not the John Looney who was born in 1770, son of Daniel Looney, b. 1745.

John Looney (Yack) b. 1848 was to inherit his father's Gob ny Scoute land following the death of both parents. This is per the instructions in his father's 1770 will.

John Looney (Yack) b. 1748 made another will in November 1835, about a month before he died, and he did not mention any land transfers, because he had already taken care of it. He did mention two Stowell grandchildren who were living with him as heirs.

John Looney Sen, b. 1748 transfered Gob ny Scoute to his son, John Looney Jr, b. 1777, in 1831.

Personally I think Radcliffe got it right when they said that "The third son John (1748-1835) bought the intact Boshin and other land near what became the Hibernian, the inn first opened by his son John and his wife Rachel."

Now I know that you want to come back with the arguement that John Looney could not have been born in 1748 because there was another brother named Thomas who was Christened in 1748. Without a Christening date for John there is the possibility that he was born in 1747 or 1749. We really don't know the exact birth dates for either individual. I'm not going to claim they were twins because I have not seen that implied in any historical document.