Replies

So apparently you do not understand the necessity of the Levitical Priesthood for Jewish Temple worship. Also, you apparently do not understand the meaning of 'parents' from a DNA standpoint in identifying the two women who were mothers of note used in the BYU dissembling talking points to respond when DNA is brought up. Go back one or two generations prior to the two females becoming parents and you have common mitochondrial DNA, so the entire farce from BYU's talking points collapses on itself ... and that talking point was supposedly from a microbiologist! Wouldn't want to be in his classes if that's the depth of his understanding..

Dig a little, learn a little about DNA alleles and markers and we'll discuss it further ... you may awaken to come out of Mormonism! The DNA evidence of Native Americans points to their being descended from Asians not Jews. If they were descended from Jews, there are markers that would be present regadless of how much 'mixing' you try to infer. Period. This is not seeking to prove a negative, the evidence points away from the fabrication by Smith in his novel. Trying to substantiate the fable in the B of M is like sending someone to find an address in Chicago by giving them a map of Los Angeles. It's getting comical, actually.

In a court of law, if the assertions by Smith regarding genetic descent were on trial for fraud, and DNA evidence proving Asian descent were presented, the fraud would be verified. Apparently you choose to ignore this. That's fine, readers aren't missing the fine points here. Keep spittling.

>>Dig a little, learn a little about DNA alleles and markers and we'll discuss it further ..

I have already posted (#449) of the evidence of the Q-P36 genetic haplotype that shows a link. Apparently you decided not to dicuss it. You are still taking the position that there can be no link. So lets discuss the haplotype identified, What is your opinion?