If you think your carefully-researched genealogy is error free -- that's a delusion! It's not a question of whether there are errors but how many.
If there are 1000 people in your family tree, each with say ten facts: first name, last name, father's name, mother's name, birth date, birth place, marriage date, marriage place, spouse name, death date, death place, that's already more than ten and you could add many more. With 10,000 facts if you have 99.9% confidence each fact is correct then 10 will likely be erroneous.
The error rate will escalate massively if you made an error in identifying the parent - such as hiding an illegitimate birth by claiming a young woman's child was her mother's - which makes all upstream facts incorrect.
Even DNA evidence has problems, as explained in an article 'DNA evidence, far from an open and shut case' in the UK Guardian newspaper. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/oct/14/vaughan-bell-on-science-forensics
The influence of these biases is likely to have a much wider effect than just on fingerprint analysis. Dror notes that they could affect any area where "the human examiner is the main instrument of analysis", including fingerprinting, DNA, CCTV images, firearms and document examination. "The contextual influences are many and they come in many forms," says Dror. "Many… [if not] most of the forensic areas are vulnerable." These warnings have met with a frosty welcome from many forensic scientists who, despite the evidence, have balked at the suggestion that they could be anything less than objective.Would the welcome from professional genealogists assiduously following the genealogical proof standard be any less frosty?