Replies

This will be far briefer because most has been addressed in the previous post.

Let me make one thing perfectly clear, I understand blood typing, but I learned long ago that you cannot underestimate the intelligence of an anti Mormon.

And blood typing has absolutely nothing to do with looking at mtDNA. Again, you get off your script and you show you shallowness in the matter.

Why is there oral tradition of the Lemba tribe enough for serious investigation, yet the Indians in Los Lunas's stories about the rock are not?

One is documented by hard physical evidence that is testable, the other is heresy.

They can now, when was the data for the studies you are quoting collected? not within the last five years... (your comment is being filed in the appropriate receptacle, along with all the others.

Just for the lurkers, since DU it is uncertain he will address it in my previous (or try to ignore it like the other DNA data methodologies i presented).

While interesting, at present it does not seem that Haplotype X can serve as good evidence of Book or Mormon antiquity given the problems of dating and the failure of the model to come to grips with textual issues from the Book of Mormon. It also fails to interact responsibly with a fairly large body of literature which has led most LDS scholars to place the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica, not the Great Lakes region.

in an article published in 13 January 2009 issue of Current Biology (volume 19 issue 1) stated Haplogroup D4h3 spread into the Americas along the Pacific coast, whereas X2a entered through the ice-free corridor between the Laurentide and Cordilleran ice sheets. The examination of an additional 276 entire mtDNA sequences provides similar entry times for all common Native American haplogroups, thus indicating at least a dual origin for Paleo-Indians. This was published in 2009 with the full force and weight of the mormon Sorensen lab behind it as a co-author.

Science speaks again in the November 2003 issue of The American Journal of Human Genetics states It is notable that X2 includes the two complete Native American X sequences that constitute the distinctive X2a clade, a clade that lacks close relatives in the entire Old World, including Siberia..

As stated earlier, this is only the tip of the iceberg that directly addresses your yeh-buts about mtDNA haplotype X in the americas.

You just don't have a group of Nephites that take in small groups of people from the same region, you have a small group of Nephites who join a much larger group of unknown ancestry, then to make matters worse, the add several smaller groups also of unknown ancestry. Now that you know they were not from the same "area" what do you say about the "genetics"?

Once again, DU shows he is very shallow in his argument once he gets off script. Genetic population studies do not need pure ancestry, but follows the very traceable mtDNA (passed by women, yet present in men) and Y chromosomal sequences (passed by men). He is pure because he can some how make the claim that non of his ancestors intermarried with the dark and loathsome/B> lamanites, and was therefore white and delightful.

Once again, off script and floundering. The Bom and mormon teaching say that the continent was empty for Nephi, et al. There was no larger group for them to join. If DU bothers to read any of the posts, DNA population studies deal with regional sources (ethinic groups having the same genetic identity) and how those people migrated out from them. All of the peoples listed in the bom came from the same region. Even if a few slaves were thrown into the mix, the semetic DNA patterns would still carry down of what the bom predicts is true - the native americans are from the middle east. You are trying to hide within the LGT that in itself cannot hold water.

And you are not selective in your citations? Shame on you!

I went back to the source documents to see if they were cited correctly - they were distorted. That is the difference between you and me. I look deeper, you don't.

LOL! Can you prove any of that? No. I didn't say that everyone who was doing genetic reasearch on Indians was an anti Mormon, I said anti Mormons always make such discussions into a cesspool (reading comprehension, it's essential to a good argument.)

Yes it is because by common mormon definition, anyone who counters mormon beliefs or doctrine in any way is automatically defined as an anti-mormon.

So instead of saying they are the only ones, Nephi is saying only men that God leads can come to the Americas, and that they will be safe as long as they are righteous.

Ah yes, the old bom didn't really mean what it said ploy. Once again there is total silence regarding interactions with these others. Fact is that they are identified in vs 9 - those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem, you know that context thing. Common usage of the term nations also preclude othersThe fact that your interpretation doesn't hold water to what Smith taught (something about the original intent of the author)

Joseph Smith described the Book of Mormon as "the history of ancient America . . . from its first settlement by a colony that came from the tower of Babel [the Jaredites]" – Times and Seasons, (March 1, 1842) III:707.

Further mormon teaching affirms that the descendants of the native americans were the Lamanites I cited this earlier, but will again for completeness. The footnotes of the editions of the Book of Mormon from 1876-1921 indicate Lehi & company landed in Chile; the description of Helaman 3:8 is explicated in the [officially sanctioned] footnotes in editions of the Book of Mormon from 1880-1920: "And it came to pass that they [the Nephites] did multiply and spread, and did go forth from the land [g] southward to the land [h] northward, and did spread insomuch that they began to cover the face of the whole earth, from the sea [i] south, to the sea [j] north, from the sea [k] west, to the sea [l] east." The footnotes provide the following identifications of these lands and bodies of water: "g, South America. h, North America. i, Atlantic, south of Cape Horn. j, Arctic, north of North America. k, Pacific. l, Atlantic." These footnotes indicate the official Church interpretation of Helaman 3:8 was that the Lamanites/Nephites covered BOTH continents of the entire western hemisphere. My first bom had photos of the great lakes and identified them as the great waters listed in the bom.

And they discovered a people, who were called the people of Zarahemla

Behold, it came to pass that Mosiah discovered that the people of Zarahemla came out from Jerusalem at the time that Zedekiah, king of Judah, was carried away captive into Babylon. Hint, hint DU, they would have the same genetic make up as Nephi - vs 9 thing again.

Mulek came from Jerusalem too - fancy that and would have the same semetic genetic background.

There were Descendants of Ishmael

Who also came from the region of Israel - wow fancy that.

Mormon makes a point of saying he is "a pure descendant of Lehi" as if this was a rare thing.

stayed white and delightsome. All that you have done is to prove that these others were from Israel and the surrounding region and would carry the those semetic genetic patterns and types. In you blindness, you ignore that current science, endorsed by the Sorenson Foundation, places men here far, far earlier. Not only does the bom fail to document interactions with these established peoples, these same peoples document interactions with everyone but these hebrew speaking people.

See how hard it is when people speak in imprecise terms? Multitude (exactly how many is that?) "Exceedingly great" again an imprecise term. As for 300,000 warriors, I did a search on the BOM, and as I remembered it, the largest number of "thousands" was "even to exceed the number of thirty thousand" so you are off by a couple of orders of magnitude. (which is par for the course) That said some of the "uncounted" numbers include to records og Genocide where a people were basically wiped out, men women and children so there really is no need to have a "population" to "support" them.

Those were from Sorenson - a pro-mormon. The largest number listed for the Nephite record is 230,000 thousand in Mormon 6:11-14. That is only a count of the 'warriors', not the women and children. You cannot reconcile that the bom uses such general and expansive terms as “multiply in the land”, “fill the land”, “multiply exceedingly”, or “numberless” all of which are relative terms and could mean anything from thousands to millions. You have to duck behind LGT to hide the facts.

As for beginning their own race... It was an ideological difference, ending up in a people who looked different I don't think you can prove they intended to start their own race.

Way off your script again, a new race was not created, what genetic differences were there between the two groups - none, both were Jews. To say otherwise would deny mormonism's claim that the indians were descendants of jewish ancestors. LOL, go look up the definition. As I asked earlier, did God change the Lamanite dna when he made them dark and loathsome? LOL, keep spinning du

GZ: Well, you tweaked my interest, please document these earthquakes that destroyed entire civilizations in the Americas, as this geological history should be most enlightening. I do not propose to "educate" you, nor do I expect to convince you since most of these anomalies are just that to archeologists who want everything to fit, so I'll mention the road to nowhere (A road that runs across the land, down the beach and into the ocean near Bimini Island.

ROTFLAICGU, how appropriate DU - a road to no where. And your authoritative site has this posted at the top -

Presented at the July 2003 International MUFON Symposium in Dearborn, Michigan, July 4, 5, 6, 2003. Visit www.mufon.com for more information

I am a professional geologist, I don't go to UFO conventions to gain insights on recent tectonic activity in the world. My goodness you are waaaaay off of your script now (and you accused me of wearing tinfoil). Ladies and gentleman, lurkers of FR, this is another example of how mormonism supports its interpretations

You lose. Zoram, Mulek, Ishmael; we don't know their genetic makeup.

Zoram Alma 54: 23 I am Ammoron, and a descendant of Zoram, whom your fathers pressed and brought out of Jerusalem.
Mulek - a son of Zedekiah, king at the time of Jerusalem. Wow and you say we don't know their genetic makeup? Its all right there in the bom - they are hebrews and as such carry the semitic genetic makeup. Stick to your script du, you are way over your head.

Amazing, you have an eminently qualified scientist, one who's work you have to cite in order to make the case against us, who then joins the church after saying the findings against us are wrong and you want to cite his early work, dismiss the work that disagrees with you and besmirchg his reputation by saying that he is now compromised becasue of his (new) faith.

As was clearly shown in this and the previous post, Crandall had the information regarding the mtDNA X in the americas, and chose to ignore it. As shown later by Southerton and others, his interpretation of the data was premature (or flawed, since he didn't factor in the other data). But that is moot now because of the 2009 report that has mormons from the Sorenson Genetic Foundation that has clearly identified the X2a as a separate haplogroup not related to the old world (hint - Europe or middle east). Whether or not his new found faith created a zeal that overroad his common sense and common practices of science, only he can answer. But his treatment of the data was clearly flawed.

It's the old Occam's razor thing again, which is more likely, that you are a flat earther when it comes to Mormons, or that Keith Crandall suddenly lost his mind and joined a church that he could prove wrong scientifically? Occam's razor slices you pretty deep on that one.

An appeal to authority is a flawed methodology to apply to Occam's razor. Occam's razor is based upon the burden of proof and the simplest answer that evidence points to. Mormonism has no evidence, nada, zero, zilch as the studies and reports I've posted show. And if geologic interpretations from a presentation at a UFO convention is part of mormonism's evidence, then mormon scholarship and apologetics are truly bankrupt.

GZ This will be far briefer because most has been addressed in the previous post.

That would be a change of pace.

GZ And blood typing has absolutely nothing to do with looking at mtDNA. Again, you get off your script and you show you shallowness in the matter.

The blood typing was an example of a corrupted source, which you have never addressed.

GZ One is documented by hard physical evidence that is testable, the other is heresy.

Science and faith mixed, sounds like a perfect recipe for a flat earth convention!

GZ Just for the lurkers, since DU it is uncertain he will address it in my previous (or try to ignore it like the other DNA data methodologies i presented).

I will address your DNA issues as soon as you address the corrupted and diluted DNA that I have pointed out until then your conclusions are moot.

GZ As stated earlier, this is only the tip of the iceberg that directly addresses your yeh-buts about mtDNA haplotype X in the americas.

As I stated earlier, the DNA tests only matter if you start with a clean sample, and keep it clean as you go, they didn't do either.

DU You just don't have a group of Nephites that take in small groups of people from the same region, you have a small group of Nephites who join a much larger group of unknown ancestry, then to make matters worse, the add several smaller groups also of unknown ancestry. Now that you know they were not from the same "area" what do you say about the "genetics"?

GZ Once again, DU shows he is very shallow in his argument once he gets off script. Genetic population studies do not need pure ancestry, but follows the very traceable mtDNA (passed by women, yet present in men) and Y chromosomal sequences (passed by men). He is pure because he can some how make the claim that non of his ancestors intermarried with the dark and loathsome/B> lamanites, and was therefore white and delightful.

LOL! You always call every one shallow, I just wish we could all be as "deep" as you, LOL!

OK, let's talk Mitochondria, it's only passed by women to all their children (male and female) and it only is a good trace if you don't add other women from outside the group being traced, oops Well there goes that one.

As to the purity, LOL! After Christ came, everyone became lighter skinned until some went and took up the old oaths, so he could have had some Lamanite blood and been white. Saying that he was a "Pure descendant of Lehi" can only mean it was possible not to be a descendant of Lehi, or a partial descendant.

DU You just don't have a group of Nephites that take in small groups of people from the same region, you have a small group of Nephites who join a much larger group of unknown ancestry, then to make matters worse, the add several smaller groups also of unknown ancestry. Now that you know they were not from the same "area" what do you say about the "genetics"?

GZ Once again, off script and floundering.

What is that? Is that supposed to make me mad? LOL! I am never "on script" I do all my writing on my own and don't rely on anti sites to feed me issues.

GZ The Bom and mormon teaching say that the continent was empty for Nephi, et al.

You said htat before, I debunked it before. The book of Mormon says the exact opposite, there were people here when they got here, and Nephi knew more would come.

Lurkers, you don't have to wonder, Get a Book of Momron and look it up yourself.

GZ There was no larger group for them to join.

One of the First groups they found was the people of Zarahemla: Omni 1:14

14 And they discovered a people, who were called the people of Zarahemla. Now, there was great rejoicing among the people of Zarahemla; and also Zarahemla did rejoice exceedingly, because the Lord had sent the people of Mosiah with the plates of brass which contained the record of the Jews.

They continued to meet other peoples and it was not even remarked on most of the time, this being a spiritual record.

GZ If DU bothers to read any of the posts, DNA population studies deal with regional sources (ethinic groups having the same genetic identity) and how those people migrated out from them. All of the peoples listed in the bom came from the same region. Even if a few slaves were thrown into the mix, the semetic DNA patterns would still carry down of what the bom predicts is true - the native americans are from the middle east. You are trying to hide within the LGT that in itself cannot hold water. I have read your posts, and lost braincells thereby.

Let's take the slaves issue (which alone could make it a corrupted sample) Let's try a few examples of slavery:

A) the Good old USofA way back before any of us was born there were slaves in the south, of course they would have the same DNA as us because they were living in the same area, wait, no they don't...

B) Joseph in the Bible was a slave in Egypt for a while, so of course he would have... No that does not work either.

With the exception of Africa, I know of no place that was enslaving their own people at that point in history (600 BC) Most slaves came from "elsewhere".

So Zoram being a slave could have been African, or Asian, or whatever and bingo corrupted genome. My point is since you don't know, you can't prove a negative.

DU Why is there oral tradition of the Lemba tribe enough for serious investigation, yet the Indians in Los Lunas's stories about the rock are not?

GZ One is documented by hard physical evidence that is testable, the other is heresy.

I'm sorry which is it, science or religion? Of yeah, flat Earthers think they are the same thing. So once it's proven by science, it's OK with the faith, I got it.

Cart Before the Horse Pictures, Images and Photos

DU They can now, when was the data for the studies you are quoting collected? not within the last five years... (your comment is being filed in the appropriate receptacle, along with all the others.)

GZ While interesting, at present it does not seem that Haplotype X can serve as good evidence of Book or Mormon antiquity given the problems of dating and the failure of the model to come to grips with textual issues from the Book of Mormon. It also fails to interact responsibly with a fairly large body of literature which has led most LDS scholars to place the Book of Mormon in Mesoamerica, not the Great Lakes region.

Godzilla, before you can even hope to address the results of a test, you must first asses what you are trying to find, which is the DNA that went on the trip, and if you don't know what even some of that DNA was, well you don't know waht to look of and will not even know if you find it.

Until the issue of who's DNA started toward America is resolved and DNA results is a case of having the cart before the horse. I truly understand you desire to skip to the end and declare us wrong, but to do so without crossing all your I's and dotting all your T's well you end up looking like the metaphor I just mixed for your amusement.

<--Skipping all the Irrelevant DNA studies that can't be useful because we did not start at the beginning -->

GZ As stated earlier, this is only the tip of the iceberg that directly addresses your yeh-buts about mtDNA haplotype X in the Americas.

It's not "Yeh Buts", but "So whats" The results you are getting are consistent with what I would expect from what I read in the Book of Mormon, Hence, the So what? factor.

GZ Once again, DU shows he is very shallow in his argument once he gets off script.

Now I know why these get so long... you wast a lot of time getting personal... (and no, I am not going to report you, i think it detracts from your argument, please, keep doing it.)

GZ Genetic population studies do not need pure ancestry

You know, I'd love to see you convince a real population Geneticist of that. (Hey we can find whatever you want in your DNA for a little extra... LOL!)

GZ but follows the very traceable mtDNA (passed by women, yet present in men) and Y chromosomal sequences (passed by men).

Someone needs a refresher course on DNA, read this --> complex genetic testing involving autosomal DNA: The Mitochondria DNA would only be preserved intact if there were no women from outside the Group included. There were such women from the very beginning.

GZ He is pure because he can some how make the claim that non of his ancestors intermarried with the dark and loathsome/B> lamanites, and was therefore white and delightful.

You may be a racist, and you might consider this to be a valid interpretation, to me it makes no sense, ergo you are grasping at straws. Let's review the Exact verse this is from:
3 Ne. 5: 20

20 I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi. I have reason to bless my God and my Savior Jesus Christ, that he brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem, (and no one knew it save it were himself and those whom he brought out of that land) and that he hath given me and my people so much knowledge unto the salvation of our souls.

This does not seem to be a time for Racism, this colophon is a time to point out that he is a genetic descendant of Israel and to thank God for that.

DU You just don't have a group of Nephites that take in small groups of people from the same region, you have a small group of Nephites who join a much larger group of unknown ancestry, then to make matters worse, the add several smaller groups also of unknown ancestry. Now that you know they were not from the same "area" what do you say about the "genetics"?

GZ Once again, off script and floundering.

Once again, you just can't help but make it personal, LOL! GZ The Bom and mormon teaching say that the continent was empty for Nephi, et al.

That is completely false.

GZ There was no larger group for them to join.

The people of Zarahemla who's ancestry we don't know...

GZ If DU bothers to read any of the posts, DNA population studies deal with regional sources (ethnic groups having the same genetic identity) and how those people migrated out from them.

Let's test that shall we, I live in Utah, therefore If I migrate to New York you'll be able to trace me back to Utah by my neighbors. Let's see, I came originally from the mid west, My next door neighbor comes from Wyoming, and on the other side Peru. I don't think this is going to work out very well.

Let me try: can you hear me now? Pictures, Images and Photos

can you hear me now? Pictures, Images and Photos

DNA population studies deal with cohesive populations (ethnic groups having the same Identity) and how those people keep their identity when physically moved to a new location by being genetically conservative.

Yeah, that would work, except that's not what we have, slaves are not always, or even often of the same genetic ethnic groups as the slave owner. Can you hear me now?

GZ All of the peoples listed in the bom came from the same region.

This is precisely the Flaw that invalidates the whole DNA to prove you wrong scenario, we don't know that, we have slaves and their daughters marrying in right at the beginning of the departure. GZ Even if a few slaves were thrown into the mix, the semetic DNA patterns would still carry down of what the bom predicts is true - the native americans are from the middle east. You are trying to hide within the LGT that in itself cannot hold water.

Actually, that is not true. If you assume the America's was completely unpopulated, and no-one else came from anywhere else... Then maybe you'll find something recognizable, maybe. But since the Book of Mormon says there were other people (several times in fact) and they just keep adding them in, and since we know the vikings had an outpost here for a while and the Spaniards and the Europeans were happily married into the Indian population I submit that you have no evidence supporting a genetically conservative people, and since the Book of Mormon lists some descendants of Ishmael, Mormons colophon staing that he was a pure descendant of Lehi makes more sense as a genetic statement than as a racist comment.

DU And you are not selective in your citations? Shame on you!

GZ I went back to the source documents to see if they were cited correctly - they were distorted. That is the difference between you and me. I look deeper, you don't.

I.. I look Deep really, stop calling me shallow you big, you big bully you Bwahhhaa!

LOL! I think the amount of links and evidence I include in my posts and the amount of links and evidence you include in your posts speaks for itself.

DU LOL! Can you prove any of that? No. I didn't say that everyone who was doing genetic research on Indians was an anti Mormon, I said anti Mormons always make such discussions into a cesspool (reading comprehension, it's essential to a good argument.)

GZ Yes it is because by common mormon definition, anyone who counters mormon beliefs or doctrine in any way is automatically defined as an anti-mormon.

Can you please point me to the "Common Mormon Dictionary"? LOL!
Anti Mormons are people who oppose the church, not just people who said something bad about us once or twice. Some times people say things about us that are not flattering, but are true. They are not anti Mormons, the pope for example has said things that are unflattering about Mormons, he has also said some nice things, he's not an anti Mormon.

The researchers who don't bother to get involved in religious wars are smart in that they will never live down the scorn of the side they don't agree with.

Let's take Keith Crandall, In this very thread you have impugned his integrity because of his findings, do you think you;ll get over that in five years?, ten? Twenty? If things hold true to form antis will be cursing his name until and unless he leaves the church and fights against it, then all will be forgiven by the antis and he will be their darling.

DU So instead of saying they are the only ones, Nephi is saying only men that God leads can come to the Americas, and that they will be safe as long as they are righteous.

GZ Ah yes, the old bom didn't really mean what it said ploy.

Actually, the Book of Mormon means exactly what it says, but not if you pick one scripture out of a chapter and ignore the ones around it, speaking of selective Citations...

GZ Once again there is total silence regarding interactions with these others.

You know, it's not as if it was written as a "historical document" it's a spiritual record, but it does talk about finding other groups like the people of Zarahemla for example.

GZ Fact is that they are identified in vs 9 - those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem, you know that context thing. Common usage of the term nations also preclude others The fact that your interpretation doesn't hold water to what Smith taught (something about the original intent of the author)

LOL! Like you would know the original intent of the author, you think Joseph smith was the author, LOL! (do you know what a begging the question is?), that and calling your suppositions facts is just funny, please keep it amusing!

Let's broaden our scriptural scope a bit (again, I know Lurkers, I know)
@ Nephi 1:5-11

5 But, said he, notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord.
6 Wherefore, I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord.
7 Wherefore, this land is consecrated unto him whom he shall bring. And if it so be that they shall serve him according to the commandments which he hath given, it shall be a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound cursed shall be the land for their sakes, but unto the righteous it shall be blessed forever.
8 And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance.
9 Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall keep his commandments they shall be blessed upon the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever.
10 But behold, when the time cometh that they shall dwindle in unbelief, after they have received so great blessings from the hand of the Lord—having a knowledge of the creation of the earth, and all men, knowing the great and marvelous works of the Lord from the creation of the world; having power given them to do all things by faith; having all the commandments from the beginning, and having been brought by his infinite goodness into this precious land of promise—behold, I say, if the day shall come that they will reject the Holy One of Israel, the true Messiah, their Redeemer and their God, behold, the judgments of him that is just shall rest upon them.
11 Yea, he will bring other nations unto them, and he will give unto them power, and he will take away from them the lands of their possessions, and he will cause them to be scattered and smitten.

Now, Godzilla, I took your advice and added Color to the Quote, See the text in red? Yeah, put verse 9 in that context (five comes before nine in the book and in counting) thus we see (that's a bit of Book o fmomron Lingo) that the context of 2 Nephi verse nine is that nations will not "know" of this land, but that peoples from many countries will come here being led by the lord, and that this group comes from Jerusalem.

Can you hear me now? Do I need to speak more slowly? Again?

GZ Joseph Smith described the Book of Mormon as "the history of ancient America . . . from its first settlement by a colony that came from the tower of Babel [the Jaredites]" – Times and Seasons, (March 1, 1842) III:707.

Tower of Babel which was when? Before Jacob was born, surely you are not going to say he would have the DNA of people he might or might not be related to...

DU And they discovered a people, who were called the people of Zarahemla

15 Behold, it came to pass that Mosiah discovered that the people of Zarahemla came out from Jerusalem at the time that Zedekiah, king of Judah, was carried away captive into Babylon.

GZ Hint, hint DU, they would have the same genetic make up as Nephi - vs 9 thing again.

Hint Hint Godzilla, are you willing to stake your professional reputation on that? We just don't know, we can assume, but it throws the results of any DNA test into doubt. The group that came with Lehi included a slave and his descendants, what makes you think the people of Zarahemla had pure DNA? Because it works for what you are trying to accomplish? Nice try... You keep demanding unbroken chains of evidence for proofs for the Book of Mormon, don't you think you should demand the same for proof against?

This is precisely why I originally cited you for an Appeal to Ignorance, you see, your premise here seems to be that since we don't know, we can assume it is the way anti's want it to be..., and we just can't. That was the whole point of Keith Crandall's paper. You can't prove the Book ofmormons false by it's own Tenets with DNA because there is too much ambiguity in where the people who populate the book come from, thus you just can't prove the negative. The positive on the other hand is still possible to prove, it just has not been. Again, Keith says that they Mayans are where you should start looking if you want to find that proof positive (which I personally believe will never happen) And again just to come completely full circle "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" -- Hugh Nibley (who is not infallible) GZ Who also came from the region of Israel - wow fancy that.

Mulek was indeed from Israel, as a son of Zedikiah, we can even be sure of his geneology, his companions on the trip, the people he picked up along the way... Well more questions marks I'm afraid.

you see, in order to prove a negative, you have to eliminate all positives, not just one, to prove a positive, all I have to do is have one positive. God answered and said it was his word. That's good enough for me. I'll stake not just my professional reputation, but my eternal salvation on God's word, you?

DU Mormon makes a point of saying he is "a pure descendant of Lehi" as if this was a rare thing.

GZ stayed white and delightsome.

You are still going with the racism thing even after all the other people who he could have been related to? LOL! Well you're persistent if not smart!

GZ All that you have done is to prove that these others were from Israel and the surrounding region and would carry the those semetic genetic patterns and types. In you blindness, you ignore that current science, endorsed by the Sorenson Foundation, places men here far, far earlier.

It's not blindness, as soon as you have parties of people from differing times and of differing ancestry, some you are only told the leader's ancestry, you just don't have enough to perform a reliable genetic study from. Turn it around, if I had to "assume" as much data as you "assume" here to get a positive, you'd rightfully be laughing me out of town. Pleas keep it up, you look silly insisting that Rocks were forged but bloodlines that are undocumented are pure, it's funny actually.

GZ Not only does the bom fail to document interactions with these established peoples, these same peoples document interactions with everyone but these hebrew speaking people.

Gosh, I'm sorry, the book of Mormon wasn't written in a way that makes it easy to discredit, maybe it was written for spiritual reasons...

DU As for beginning their own race... It was an ideological difference, ending up in a people who looked different I don't think you can prove they intended to start their own race.

GZ Way off your script again, a new race was not created

Then why did you say it was, go back and look, I was responding to you saying the Lamanites were a race...

GZ what genetic differences were there between the two groups - none, both were Jews.

Actually, that's another part of the problem, none of them were Jews, the Jews are one of the twelve tribes of Israel, they were descendants of Judah, Lehi was a descendant of Joseph Through Manasseh, Joseph had a different mother then Judah (see your section on Mitochondrial DNA), and while Leah and Rachel were sisters, it would have only mattered to have Rachel married off first if she was from the first wife, and Leah from the Second. There is the distinct possibility that Leah and Rachel had differing Mitochondrial DNA and therefore their descendants would have differing DNA too. Now you are going to argue that Polygamy was not that common, or bad or something, Jacob was given both sisters to be his wife by their father, who actually set the whole thing up, and worse Leah got one week before Rachel joined the family. So obviously they did not have the problems we do with polygamy, I mean come on DAD set up both daughters with the same guy one week apart!

Again, the only reason it would have mattered is if they were of different mothers so the DNA thing. Now you have Joseph who is from Rachel and Judah who is from Leah. This complicates the whole DNA identification nes pas?

Hopefully now you can see why I can say, I don't think this will ever be proven.

GZ To say otherwise would deny mormonism's claim that the indians were descendants of jewish ancestors. LOL, go look up the definition. As I asked earlier, did God change the Lamanite dna when he made them dark and loathsome? LOL, keep spinning du

Sigh, it's not a spin, it's truth, just because you are from the middle east, does not mean you will have Jewish DNA, or all the Arabs would insist on blood transfusions and Gene therapy "now dang it NOW!"

As for the Indians not being descendants, they are, just not direct - Exclusive, or Pure descendants, so?

GZ I am a professional geologist, I don't go to UFO conventions to gain insights on recent tectonic activity in the world. My goodness you are waaaaay off of your script now (and you accused me of wearing tinfoil). Ladies and gentleman, lurkers of FR, this is another example of how mormonism supports its interpretations

So if I take your paper and present it at a UFO convention, you are less credible? You are more shallow than I thought.

GZ Zoram Alma 54: 23 I am Ammoron, and a descendant of Zoram, whom your fathers pressed and brought out of Jerusalem.
Mulek - a son of Zedekiah, king at the time of Jerusalem. Wow and you say we don't know their genetic makeup? Its all right there in the bom - they are hebrews and as such carry the semitic genetic makeup. Stick to your script du, you are way over your head.

Ammoron is a descendant of Zoram, who was pressed into service in at jerusalem, great, and who might his ancestry be? We don't know.

Mulek - was a descendant of the house of Abraham, and his entourage? We don't know.

DU Amazing, you have an eminently qualified scientist, one who's work you have to cite in order to make the case against us, who then joins the church after saying the findings against us are wrong and you want to cite his early work, dismiss the work that disagrees with you and besmirching his reputation by saying that he is now compromised because of his (new) faith.

GZ As was clearly shown in this and the previous post, Crandall had the information regarding the mtDNA X in the americas, and chose to ignore it.

Why? Why would a scientist with everything to lose and nothing to gain ignore such evidence? Because after a careful analysis of the Book of Mormon, he determined that no DNA test could prove it wrong, that's why.

GZ As shown later by Southerton and others, his interpretation of the data was premature (or flawed, since he didn't factor in the other data).

OK, you are a Geologist, if I tried to use some of your work to disagree with you about the probability of an oil deposit under a hill and you come along and look at my data and laugh out loud while saying there is no way there is oil there that's solid granite, and I disagree, who's gonna look silly?

I would. Southerton is a plant biologist for crying out loud he is as out of his depth with Popluation Genetics as I would be geology, quoting him is just like quoting from a UFO convention!

GZ But that is moot now because of the 2009 report that has mormons from the Sorenson Genetic Foundation that has clearly identified the X2a as a separate haplogroup not related to the old world (hint - Europe or middle east).

So what? If you can't nail down that the group had a pure sample, you can't prove anything but a positive, the negative just has to many explanations.
GZ Whether or not his new found faith created a zeal that overroad his common sense and common practices of science, only he can answer.

Only Scott Southerton's New found faith and new found zeal overrode his common sense and common practice of science in disregarding the need for a pure sample and conservative genetic practices. (see how this cuts both ways, besides it's another Appeal to Ignorance...)

GZ But his treatment of the data was clearly flawed.

Yeah! Go get Him you geologist you! Wow, I wish I was an actor so I could comment on politics, or a Geologist so I could comment on DNA studies! (laughter echos)

DU It's the old Occam's razor thing again, which is more likely, that you are a flat earther when it comes to Mormons, or that Keith Crandall suddenly lost his mind and joined a church that he could prove wrong scientifically? Occam's razor slices you pretty deep on that one.

GZ An appeal to authority is a flawed methodology to apply to Occam's razor.

Um, an Appeal to Authority is basically where the argument is made that an authority has already reviewed the case and decided, so there is no need to investigate further, it is meant to end discussion. I did not do that.

What I just did was more of an appeal to common sense.

GZ Occam's razor is based upon the burden of proof and the simplest answer that evidence points to.

Really? and here I thought the definition was "the maxim that assumptions introduced to explain a thing must not be multiplied beyond necessity."

It seems to me that you apply a lot of assumptions to get to a negative result on the DNA to prove the Book of Mormon wrong, hence Occam's razor keeps cutting you when you try to use it.

GZ Mormonism has no evidence, nada, zero, zilch as the studies and reports I've posted show.

Yet, I post hings that do show evidence, thus some exists, you just are not accepting it, which is perfectly OK with me. The problem is then you insist the reality bend to your opinion, and if just does not do that.

GZ And if geologic interpretations from a presentation at a UFO convention is part of mormonism's evidence, then mormon scholarship and apologetics are truly bankrupt.

LOL! When Genetic studies by a Population Geneticist are questions by a plant biologist as part of the argument against the Book of Mormon, the anti Mormons are truly bankrupt.

See how easy it is to spout platitudes?

Let's recap: until someone can show the genealogy of every one in all the groups that joined with Lehi back to someone in the house of Israel, then the sample is possibly corrupted.

An uncorrupted sample is required for a negative proof against the Book of Mormon to eliminate the possibility of error.

A genetic sample from the house of Joseph (not Judah) is required to compare with the genetics of the descendants of Lehi in order to prove a negative.

Anti morons don't have any of the above, they have flawed studies that are based on their assumptions about the Book of Mormon, which are just not true.

Now let's hit some of the things we have talked about. There are several stones in the USA which bear engravings that when translated as early (paleo) Hebrew render as an abridgment of the ten commandments. There are places that match the descriptions of fortifications built by Nephites, there are fossilized bones of horses, there are places in the interior of Arabia that match closely with the places described by the Book of Mormon. The Lachish Letters are an Archeological proof for the Book of Mormon that is amazing in it's exactness of the description of the events in Jerusalem in 600 BC. I could go on, but logical people will see that pattern.

Anti Mormons ridicule and dismiss evidence after evidence and after dismissing all the evidence legitimately or otherwise, they declare "there is no evidence" as if the act of making that declaration will make it so.

Such actions are IMHO truly pathetic.