Hebrew DNA found in South America? [OPEN]

Mormon Times ^ | Monday, May. 12, 2008 | By Michael De Groote

[Godzilla]

Another excellent post AAC!

[Godzilla]

Repent of your attacks on the restored church of Jesus Christ, for I testify to you that Jesus lives, the Book of Mormon is God's word, and God will not hold blameless in the last day he who tries to pervert the kingdom of God.

[Tennessee Nana]

God will not hold blameless in the last day he who tries to pervert the kingdom of God.
______________________________________________

Little Joey Smith is in a heap of trouble....

[AmericanArchConservative]

DER IZ no FLUFFY!

DER IZ ONLY ZUUUL! ZUUUL I tellz you.

He will take the form of the Sta-Puft marshmallow man...

A.A.C.

[Tennessee Nana]

FAITH CANNOT ALTER FACTS

[AmericanArchConservative]

Thanks

It struck me sitting here this morning the “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...” argument is frequently and speciously used...

Mostly by liberals.

Let me explain.

Since 1964, we have been waging a “War on Poverty” (thanks LBJ...) and the cost (before zer0dumbo took office) exceeds six trillion dollars to date.

Poverty still seems to be winning, but that doesn’t stop our congresscritters from deflaring that what they really need is to confiscate more of our money to throw into the problem.

Which is kind of like throwing a wad of $500 bills into a blender with some sugar water, and drinking it down.

A really fast approach to pissing away a lot of money.

There is no evidence that the “great society” programs, or the old “new deal” programs have helped any of the problems they purported to address (there are lots of indications that they may in fact hurt all of us), but the ‘critters’ presist in their unsupported belief system asserting basically that the absence of evidence (of effectiveness of programs) is not evidence...

Stem cell research.

Liberal politicians want fetal stem cell research on the table with no limitations whatsoever.

Of course, we all pretty well know they are on the payroll of the abortion mega-industrial complex, one way or another...

To date fetal stem cell research has yielded NO significant scientific breakthroughs.

The major discoveries that offer hope for addressing human disease and deterioration have originated from either “cord blood”, or some other form of adult stem cells.

But the absence of evidence of discoveries/applicability sourced in fetal stem cells is not regarded...

by liberals...

as being (sufficiently) evidence of the ABSENCE of possible effectiveness to be gained by fetal stem cell research.

That is the crux of their continued argument as we know all too well. “Well, nothing has been found in that area of research - YET. But that doesn’t mean nothing will be found in the near future. We are really hopeful...we just need greater funding!”

Libs were long convinced that there was proof of organic life having existed on Mars...

Same tired argumentative approach there, same type of tired old statements being issued by their spokesmouths.

All just angling for more limitless ‘gubbermint’ money.

You would think somebody, somewhere could come up with a better “catchy cliche” in their attempt to undermine the points of those not in total agreement as a means to bolster their own suppositions.

or not

A.A.C.

[Tennessee Nana]

It’s Still the Cross

It’s not conservative or liberal, However they’re defined;
It’s not about interpretation, Or the judgment of the mind;

It’s the opposite of politics, Power or prestige;
It’s about a simple message, And whether we believe.

It’s still the cross, It’s still the blood of Calvary;
That cleanses sins, And sets the captives free.
It’s still the name, The name of Jesus,
That has power to save the lost; It’s still the cross.

(As sung by Gold City)

[Elsie]

Mere coincidence; GENTILE.

Mere coinky dink.

—MormonDude(There are an awful lot of them surrounding MORMONism - but MY faith in what Joseph Smith and his witnesses started is unwafering!)

[Elsie]

Oooooh!!

GC!

With a moniker like yern; you gotta be a Southern Gospel fan!!

[Tennessee Nana]

How do you feel about the fact that Joey Smith had sex with other men’s wives ???

Often sending the poor dupe on a trumped up “urgent mission” to a far away place to get him out of the way so that Joey would have uninterupted access to the unwilling wife ???

[Tennessee Nana]

MY faith in what Joseph Smith and his witnesses started is unwafering!)
______________________________________________

And yet neither Joey Smith nor his witnesses had “faith in what Joseph Smith and his witnesses started”

All of the witnesses at some point admitted that they hade lied about the so called gold plates ...

And all of the witnesses became apostates and left the mormon org...

Even Joey Smith himself was “unworthy” and an apostate...

He didnt believe in his own religion...

And when he got himself killed because of his polygamy, he was wearing a pagan medal of Jupiter that had Masonic emblems, around his neck...

And wasnt wearing the mandatory “Joey’s sex club” undies...

[Tennessee Nana]

With a moniker like yern; you gotta be a Southern Gospel fan!!
___________________________________________

I like any song that mentions Jesus, the name of Jesus, the blood of Jesus, and the Cross...

and anything else to do with salvation through the price of the blood of Jesus...

If it’s watered down, I dont want it...

There’s not enough power to save me...

[Godzilla]

[colorcountry]

The number of Anti Mormons here who are Ex Mormons proves that it's not that hard to get out of the church

There are four of us who are ex-mormons who regularly post on these threads. The rest of those who tried to escape have been killed (at least that is what a glowing light in my bedroom told me) < grin>

[DelphiUser]

GZ: Not so fast weedhopper

Oh, your such a funny (looking) guy!

GZ: there is an abundance of evidence – your problem is that the evidence does not support your position.

All the "Evidence" assumed the same thing, a pure genetic sample to start with, a genetically conservative people while apart and a genetically conservative people to compare to. You have to have all three to prove anything conclusive, you have maybe one. Ergo, it does not matter if you looked through a microscope and saw a DNA strand that spelled out "We are not the DNA you're looking for!" (Jedi mind trick optional!) it's just not relevant.

GZ: Your oversimplification is noted.

I was trying to explain it to you, so did I succeed? No you still think you have something, LOL!

GZ: But there are other components of DNA that are evaluated or analyzed.

And mean nothing! Let's give an example: If I take blood from 150 inmates, and mix it all together, then perform a DNA analysis trying to identify a particular murderer... I'd get tossed from Court so fast! I could literally find anything, or miss the Big red throbbing allele that would identify my guy. As a matter of fact, the odds of success are so small it's funny. With population genetics, you are looking at the descendants of a the inmates, and it get's more unsure.

All these studies assume a pure genetic sample to start with so their results are bogus, based on a faulty assumption which anyone who has actually read the Book of Mormon would never make on accident.

When you add to that, "When DNA Evidence is Ignored: Systematic Bias Against Non-Asian Origins of Ancient Americans" The assumption that any DNA that looks like it might come from Europe will cause researchers to reject that DNA as pure Indian as "corrupted"... Guess what? There is lots of Jewish DNA in Europe. So once researchers have thrown out the very alleles they are looking for, they can't find them (If you knock down the tallest building in the city, you just created a new tallest building somewhere else in the city).

GZ: And I repeat you are misquoting me. Markers are found in great abundance, they only do do not support the bom mythology.

I was not aware I was Quoting... By definition, DNA studies can only be based on what markers are found. Saying not found is just the flip side of found. As for not supporting the BOM, the BOM is clear (if you actually read it) that while the American Indians are descendants of Joseph, the majority of their DNA could come from "elsewhere". Mormon makes a point of saying he is "a pure descendant of Lehi. Saying that makes no sense if everyone is a "pure descendant" of Lehi. Add to that that Mormon's "people" were in the process of being wiped out by savages, and well I'm not surprised that you might have problems finding the alleles your looking for, or wait hoping not to find, and therefore finding something else (and thinking that means anything about the Book of Mormon, it doesn't)

GZ: Wow, the great DNA scientist Lindsey.

Wow, The great DNA scientist Godzilla.

If you are making a good argument, people should listen, if Jeff Lindsay makes a good argument, you should (likewise) listen. He makes a good point and sources it. Dismissing him because he is not a geneticist only opens the door for everyone here to dismiss you for the same reason. (Hey maybe this is not such a bad idea after all...)

GZ: Science like you and Lindsey promote put the cart before the horse (or tapir/deer).

Actually, Science like you promote would still have us sailing close to the beach so we don't fall off the edge of the earth.

GZ: You seek to find data to support your theory and ignore the vast amounts of data that show otherwise.

ROTFLOL! Now just turn that sentence around an put it in a paragraph of mine, I can see it now Mod! He's trying to tell me what I'm doing! Moderator, He's touching me! ROTFLOL!

GZ: Real science takes the data, evaluates it and develops a conceptual model with which to test the data and compare other data to.

Um, that includes actually reading the book you are claiming to destroy by it's own tenets, did you? (Um... Nnnno)

GZ: Mormon model is to identify the spiritual goal, then quote mine the studies to support the model. If the data is so conclusive in favor of mormon, why are there four different theories for the location of the bom lands?

You obviously are as "in the dark" about how Mormons do things as you are on the scientific process of DNA studies. God knows where exactly everything took place, if he wanted us to know, we'd know. Apparently he does not think it's important for our salvation.

GZ: If it is so conclusive, why are there no publications in professional journals and societies supporting the argument of Hebrew dna in the early Americas.

Um, why exactly would anyone care if not for the Book of Mormon? Keith Crandall et al can publish all they want and your side will dismiss them faster than Satan condemns righteousness. Why would anyone who didn't have to step into the cesspool anti Mormons always seem to make of discussions that could support Mormons. You know the funny thing is the "let nothing good be said" mentality is so obvious that it allows others to quickly identify and ignore anti Mormons.

GZ: They were all from the same geographic region – Israel and its immediate environs. That is your specific geographic region being studied.

and you know that how? (you don't) you want it to be so. The Book of Mormon (which you have not read) is clear about our lack of knowledge of the history the many of the people the Nephites met in the Americas.

DU: Mormon, towards the end of the Book of Mormons makes a point of saying he is a pure descendant of Lehi, as if this was a rare thing.

GZ: Means simply he has no blood of the Lamanites, nothing surprising there.

Is that what it means? Laman, Nephi's brother is also a descendent of Lehi, so being a "Pure descendant" of Lamanites would also make you a descendant of Lehi (Laman and Nephi's father). Then again if you actually read the book you might just know what you are talking about instead of making embarrassing statements like that. Here, let me highlight your massive blunder in logic and genetics for you:

DU: Mormon, towards the end of the Book of Mormon makes a point of saying he is a pure descendant of Lehi, as if this was a rare thing.

GZ: Means simply he has no blood of the Lamanites, nothing surprising there.

So descending from Nephi makes you a descendant of Lehi, but being a descendant of Laman (Nephi's full brother) does not -- Brilliance and genetic understanding on display by Godzilla.

GZ: Simple truth again DU – a group of individuals from the environs of Israel populate the new world,

Right there, is the flaw, the Book of Mormon does not say they are the only ones there, and it explicitly talks about meeting other people in the Americas. It really helps to have read the book, you know? Now back to your illogical slander:

GZ: but some how their dna is changed to resemble Asiatic peoples.

We do not claim any such thing, but why bother, here, have some more rope!

GZ: I am not superstitious about it, I simply evaluate the mountain of evidence to the contrary and am not constrained question the foundations of science on the basis of theological assumptions.

So now you stopped reading the Book of Mormon because of a Scientific evidence? My mistake, I thought you had "Bad" feelings and decided God didn't want to you to read it after calling a friend. Where on earth did I get that Idea...

DU: You know what Argumentum ad Ignorantiam is, right?

GZ: Every time I read one of your posts.

LOL! I Guess I do point out this fallacy that you keep making, but every post?

GZ: Mormon application:

If there was a civilization that numbered in the millions upon millions from sea to sea that originated from the environs of Israel, then we would have undeniable evidence of it by now.
We do not have undeniable evidence of an advanced Hebrew society in the Americas Therefore, these peoples did not / do not exist.

The Mormon rebuttal to our "Position" as stated by someone who is not a Mormon, and has not even read the book he is critiquing:

The Book of Mormon is not specific as to the size of land, it does mention bodies of water, but does not specify "sea to sea", nor does the Book of Mormon say Millions.
The Book of Mormon says that at the time of Jesus Christs death, the earth in the Americas went through major earthquakes and civilization was essentially destroyed.
Civilization never recovered, From the artifacts that have been found this matches with the Geological and Archeological history of the Americas.

GZ: Is that simple enough for you DU?

Simple and wrong, but simple, but hey, you wrote it so...

DU: All your DNA "evidence" not with standing, the Book of Mormon, didn't and Mormons for that matter don't claim that the American Indians were pure genetic descendants of Lehi, we don't and never did, the Book of Mormon itself bears witness of that. Ignoring evidence that proves you wrong and is a fallacy in and of itself.

GZ: Dishonesty in the matter is unbecoming of you. Laman (Lehi's oldest son) were called Lamanites.

OK, now you are calling me a liar about a book you have never read, and I have read many times. This is funny, it's like I had only read Genesis and was arguing with you about what Jesus said based on what others had said the Bible said. Do you see how silly you look doing this?

I am going to post part of My page, specifically, the section on DNA and the Book of Mormon, where I talk about the erroneous assumptions people make in thinking DNA will be found to prove the Book of Mormon wrong.

DNA geological studies require three things

1. A Pure genetic sample starting from a common ancestor group.
2. A genetically conservative group when living apart.
3. A genetically conservative group also from the same ancestor group for comparison.

Most genetic researches concerning the Book of Mormon assume the Book of Mormon says the ancestors of the American Indians meet these criteria, lets actually examine what the Book of Mormon says instead of "assuming".

Supposition # 1, A Pure genetic sample starting from a common ancestor group:

• Lehi is a descendant of Joseph (Lets ignore to the end the fact that Joseph and Judah were brothers who's mothers while sisters may well have been from different wives (polygamy in the Bible being so common as to be unremarkable and the desire to have the first born married "first" would only matter for inheritance if the daughters were from different mothers)
• Zoram a slave of indeterminate genetic ancestry joined the group as it fled Jerusalem.
• Ishmael, joins the party by invitation, and we are not told his lineage (probably Jewish, but we can't be sure).
• Zoram and Ishmael's genetic code will be passed on as they now have wives and are procreating.

Supposition #2 A genetically conservative group When living apart:

• And they discovered a people, who were called the people of Zarahemla
• Mulekites who came over to the Americas separately married in with the Lamanites
• There were Descendants of Ishmael
• Mormon makes a point of saying he is "a pure descendant of Lehi" as if this was a rare thing.
  
  

Supposition #3 A genetically conservative group also from the same ancestor group for comparison:

• The Jews are a well known genetically conservative group.
• Central Siberia being remote is somewhat genetically conservative, but not as genetically conservative as Jewish DNA.
• Asia is also more genetically conservative, but again not as conservative as Jewish DNA.

So, out of three things that are needed to get a match we have one. What should we find when doing this comparison?

We should get different answers with differing samples, and Gee, that's what we get.

A note to me, the Mulekites actually married in to the Nephites, but since the two intermingle at the time of Christ it's a moot point, but fix your page DU...

Since this is on my page and my page has not been updated since January 8th of this year, this is not something "New" just for you, this is what I have been saying, and what the Book of Mormon has been saying since it was first published.

I'll wait for that apology for calling me a liar...(Crickets...)

DU: The problem you have in making a good argument is that unless you can see your opponent's point you cannot accurately refute it. Anti's generally don't want to understand, just refute, thus they make tactically poor arguments such as yours here.

GZ: No, I know what your argument is. Your only defense is to obfuscate the issue to confuse the lurker – as usual.

ROTFLOL! Obfuscate and Confuse? LOL! I've actually started receiving fan mail for my posts on this Thread! (Thanks, Keep em coming!) How can you possibly be posting in a clear and concise manner about a book you have not read, quoting plant geneticists instead of population geneticists, and on top of that you seem to think that DNA is a magic wand with no requirements for an accurate result?

I will agree with you that one of us is obfuscating...

DU: The question anti's should be asking first is: "Does the Book of Mormon say the People in the Americas' preserved their genetics to the point where it could be proven wrong with DNA. The answer is no.

GZ: Wrong, it has already been shown by the Lemba tribe that this can be done and over the same period of time covered by the bom. One of these days you’ll get over that selective memory.

Speaking of Selective memory, did you forget that Keith Crandall is one of the Leading Scientists in the team that proved the link for the Lemba tribe? (that was why he was asked to review Simon Southerton's work...) You can't even discuss a precedent without quoting Keith Crandall's work, how can you then say he's wrong on this? I suppose he's a "fallen Scientist" now that he joined the Church... LOL!

You guys are funny, thanks for the laugh, give us some more "examples" from Keith's past to prove he's wrong now, come on you can do it if you try.

Lurkers please note the points here, The prior work quoted is Keith Crandall's. Keith is a specialist, Keith says you cannot prove the Book of Mormon wrong with DNA. Keith says if you want to find some Hebrew DNA, your best bet is the descendants of the Myans. (He does not say it's scientifically verifiable, he says if you want to believe that there is evidence to support it.) Keith took the obvious and logical route of reading the book he was going to challenge scientifically, and joined the church after his study was completed.

For a really easy review of the science, watch these:
part 1 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
part 2 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
Part 3 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
Godzilla, please keep posting, this has been fun!

[DelphiUser]

DU: Joseph smith did not chose to a be a prophet,

---

TN: Well, why did he pretend to be one then ????☺

He didn't pretend, he was called by God, the rest of your laundry list of tired, much refuted and often debunked slanders is just not worth my time, try being on topic. Why don't you try arguing that brothers are not both descendants of their father like Godzilla?

[DelphiUser]

Stick can be taken both ways, many prophesies are fulfilled more than one, the coming of Christ for example, the Jews were looking for a military leader to conquer the Romans for them, not a spiritual leader, thus they rejected the truth...

Deja vu all over again...

[DelphiUser]

See my prior post about prophesies being fulfilled more than one.

It could be Joseph both times... Lehi was a descendant of Joseph, yeah, the one who went into Egypt, Famine 7 ears of Corn 7 cows, etc, yeah, him.

Thanks for playing got anything on DNA? (The topic of this thread you know...)

[AmericanArchConservative]

MY faith...is unwafering!

______________________________________________________

Subconscious recognition of the inherent puerility of LDS {leavened bread and water} “communion”?

Just wondering. Think I’ll go have a “Waverly wafer”

or maybe not...?

Now I am feeling unwafering

There I go - waffling again.

having fun with a typo.

A.A.C.

(Not wavering in looking to the Saviour’s shed Blood for his salvation.)

[Tennessee Nana]

So, in mormonism, a “testimony” goes something like this...

“I KNOW THE CHURCH IS TRUE, I KNOW JOSEPH SMITH WAS A PROFIT”

That’s laughable cause even Joey Smith didnt believe that...

In accordance with mormonism, Joey Smith was unworthy and an apostate...

But Joseph Goebbels who was the Minister of Propaganda for the Nazi regime said...

“If you tell a lie long enough, it becomes the truth.”

And P T Barnum said...

“There’s a sucker born every minute”