I agree with everything Heywood had said in reply #53.
Go back over the other thread where you began.
Follow 1 direct line at a time backwards from your GF and read each post which relates to that line only. Print off the pages if it helps so that you can write comments or questions and put ticks/crosses/ question-marks/asterisks on them. Take notes. Don't be distracted by other lines. Consider the evidence and sources for each conclusion. Note down sources for each piece of information which has been verified and databases where each source was located. These sources may include parish registers, BMD indexes, BMD certificates, census and others. Consider why we were/are unsure of, or rejected some evidence. Some of this unproved evidence you will want to keep on a "possible" list. Some findings were later proved not to fit and can be eliminated from your quest. (However, some people like to keep a separate list of rejected stuff with a comment explaining why it was rejected so as not to waste time if those things pop up again in future.) Familiarise yourself with each database a person took information from. Each has pros & cons.
When you've finished following one line and understand all the workings out, return to the beginning i.e. your GF, and carry out the same procedure for another line. When you've worked through that line on the thread, return to the start and do another line and so on. Then you should see how it all fits together.
Your first thread became very complex. I think I researched only the line which led to Catherine Ryan. Other people contributed information about your GF's other ancestors. It's not surprising you were confused at times. It was a lot to take in.
RootsChat is collaborative. 2,3 or more minds are better than 1. Each mind is different. One person may follow a different route to another. They may consult different sources. A person may have particular strengths or knowledge.
We're a bit like a C.I.D. team. We gather clues. We follow evidence to wherever it takes us. We may already have a "suspect" but if there's insufficient evidence we may decide to "release" him/her, "bail" them or put them on a list of "persons of interest".
We may also switch from narrow focus to look at "the bigger picture" in the hope of acquiring useful information. Lateral thinking is a good skill. On occasions it's helpful to backtrack in order to progress.
Family history is good for the brain.