Wow, how many months did it take for you to catch that? Nice trying to hide your tripe on a formerly closed forum and not allowing for critical examination.
I have posted artifacts (which you dismissed) not gonna bother to repost here.
Artifacts.....lessee, oh yeh, that rock in New Mexico that even LDS investigators rejected. Its discoverer was also a discredited archeologist who falsified field notes and documentation to try to prove his theories were correct. Wow 1 for 1. Lessee.... oh yes, the bat creek stone??? Rejected by archaeologists (Tennessee Anthropologist Vol. XVI, No. 1, Spring 1991) as a fraud. Thats 2 for 2. Lessee, oh yeh, you had some linked to a website that also had ufo and bigfoot reports too. Got any other faith increasing artifactoid you want to dash upon the ground.
In the real world du, all artifacts are not created equal, but they rely upon a multitude of factors. Given the claim in the bom of an extensive, metallurgical advanced culture that numbered in the millions upon millions, not a single real artifact has showed up. Metallurgy (the use of metals) did not appear in the Americas until about the 9th century A.D. However, the Book of Mormon describes the use in America of iron, steel, brass, copper, silver and gold hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. Where are all these fine works DU? How does a rock with poorly copied hebrew and greek in the middle of no where establish the presence of Lamamites? Great cities of stone and concrete leave remnants DU, lots and lots of them found in Central and South America. . . . . with no evidence of hebraic influence. On the contrary, cultures are vastly different. A rock in NM and a fraudulent item can hardly even begin to equate to real archaeological finds and artifacts. Why all the weird animals and plants reported in America DU that have been shown not to exist here during the bom period until Colombus are written all over the bom, however new world animals and foods receive absolutely no mention at all? Yep smittie could spin a yarn, but his lack of education caused him to go off the deep end and dance with curlomes.
It is no wonder that there are multiple competing theories by morg apologists as to where the lands occupied by the Nephites/Lamanites really WERE. That makes it extremely apparent that the artifacts supporting the presence of bom culture here are non-existant. Even Thomas Stuart Ferguson lost his testimony over his search to prove bom archaeology.
Perhaps you need to read statements from real scientists
Smithsonian Statement on the Book of Mormon
National Geographic Letter Regarding The Book Of Mormon
As for the stuff that could be disproved in Joseph's day See This
You waived that dullard beneath my nose a while back. There is absolutely no documentation to his talk. Show me the peer review articles that state that the claims he is making are recognized by the wider archaeological community. (crickets). But since he is in the employment of BYU, he has to speak the party line of face excommunication - isn't that how mormonism has dealt with scientists who've not toed the line on the myth?
Simon G. Southerton, is a plant biologist, which means he does not specialize in animals, yet he takes other people's data and applies his interpretation to it. Interestingly, he has no name, no books, he is a nobody and a Mormon, but when he leaves the church and publishes a book "Proving the book of Mormon wrong with Genetics" he becomes a popular guy who sells books and can make a living.Let's compare that to his essentially opposite:
Keith Crandall, Keith is a population geneticist which means this is his speciality, and he already had books, job offers and was a star in the Genetics world. Keith is asked to look into the Book of Mormon DNA claims specifically because Simon is citing Keith's work as precedent, but not following Keith's methodologies. The first thing Keith does is read the Book of Mormon to note all the places where genetic claims are made. Then he analyzes it and determines that it would be impossible to prove the Book of Mormon wrong by it's own genetic claims, he then reviews the claims by those opposed to the church, finds them to be violating the rules of good genetics and because there was a grant performs a study. Surprisingly, he finds a match and while not claiming absolute confirmation (that would be amazing) he claims supporting DNA was found. Not only does Keith write this paper before joining the church, he leaves a good job, and angers an apparent group of highly motivated people by joining the church and becoming faculty at BYU.
You have guy #1 who leaves the church, then publishes a book outside his specialty, which starts earning his living. You have guy #2 who is a pioneer in his field widely recognized and respected who risks all of that to join the very church he has been investigating scientifically.
Either Keith Crandall is the biggest fool in the church, or there is no disproving DNA evidence. I believe the latter, you are free to believe ehat you wish... until Mr. Obama makes us both Muslim by executive order that is.
Then you go into the balderdash of throwing up a smokescreen of claims (mostly specious, and already disproven) which is an obvious tactic. IMHO the only reason you would do this is because your position on DNA is backed by a losing hand and you know it, so you try to change the subject precisely because the DNA evidence favors us and not you.
Perhaps you need to read statements from real scientists
I have been, and from scientists with credentials in the field in question too.
You waived that dullard beneath my nose a while back. There is absolutely no documentation to his talk. Show me the peer review articles that state that the claims he is making are recognized by the wider archaeological community. (crickets).
If you actually went to the links I gave for Keith Crandall, you would see a list of peer reviewed papers as long as your arm, maybe longer (it depends on the length of your arms...) You didn't look, so you didn't see, which is exactly my point about anti's they don't see only because they won't look.
But since he is in the employment of BYU, he has to speak the party line of face excommunication - isn't that how Mormonism has dealt with scientists who've not toed the line on the myth?
You seem to have missed the fact that he wrote his papers before he joined the church... They cannot be coerced on point of execution... Oops.
Godzilla, and I mean this with all my heart, don't give up your day job, God bless.
