Sorry, Averil, I still don't understand what you mean where you say the information came from Constance Radcliffe's Tree Bwoaillee Losht (2).

You wrote:
"I have in my Looney Family of Bwoallie Losht.

1738 Jon Looney 1st. May Fil : Wm & Margt.

For Daniel 1745 (Parish Register) and I am assuming John is Daniels Twin, also born 1745.

As in Daniels Son Robert's Family....he has 2 sets of Twins."

Do you mean CR wrote this on her Tree Bwoaillee Losht (2) or that you have added this to CR's information?
And if you added it, why would you assume that John was Daniel's twin when he wasn't baptised with him?

Sue