You know, this is about the most idiotic thing I've heard.
You and your ilk have presented literally dozens of fallacious arguments, cherry-pickings, and quote-twistings, and darn littler GENUINE "evidence to the contrary."
When it comes to early America, against the 30 or so GENUINE quotes that I've produced that show what the founding generation believed a natural born citizen was, and what was required for Presidential eligibility, I can think of only 3 bits of LEGITIMATE "evidence to the contrary" that you've ever produced.
David Ramsay, who was voted down 36 to 1 by Madison and a group including 5 other Framers.
Samuel Roberts, an obscure several-counties judge who was completely contradicted by far more widely recognized and higher-level authority such as Rawle and St. George Tucker.
And finally, the pseudonymous writer "Publius" who hesitatingly put forth his opinion that James McClure was not a citizen, admitting that he might well be wrong, and who was flatly contradicted by President Monroe's administration, which declared that McClure was a US citizen solely on the basis of his birth in Charleston.
YOU are the one that has precious little support for your stupid English Common Law theory. Under English Common Law, the ducking stool, drawing and quartering, and burning were acceptable punishments, as was the "Corruption of Blood". All were explicitly rejected by the US Constitution.
The support is only virtually every legal expert or historical authority who has ever spoken on the topic in all of history, including friends of the Framers, legal experts writing on what the Constitution meant, and judges who have analyzed the law and rendered opinions on the meaning of the term.
As for the rest of it, wow. Congratulations. You've shown that we rejected the ducking stool, drawing and quartering, and the "Corruption of Blood."
Make that:
The support is only virtually every legal expert or historical authority who has ever spoken on the topic in all of history, including the "Father of the Constitution," the main author of the Federalist papers (who was also one of our most important Framers), friends of the Framers, our most authoritative legal experts writing on what the Constitution meant, judges who have analyzed the law and rendered opinions on the meaning of the term, the United States Supreme Court, and major conservative Constitutional organizations such as National Review and the Heritage Foundation.