GZ Did a little more research. There are at least 10 maps of Arabia that would have been available to Smith or his inner circle of Rigdon, Crowdrey, Harris, and others. Seven of which have references to the area:
Niebuhr 1771 – A tribal area listed as Nehhm
Plinkerton 1813 Atlas – A tribal area listed as Nehem
Anville, 1794 atlas – A tribal area listed as Nehem
Bonne – 1785 atlas - A tribal area listed as Nagiah
Cary, 1804 atlas – Tribal area listed as Nehem
Clouet, 1787 De l’Arabie – area identified as Nagiah
Darton 1812 world atlas – tribal area listed as Nehem Haulan
I never said there were not maps, I stated they would not have been available to a teenager on a frontier farming community in New york in the early 1800s
Read a little closer next time DU, Smith was not alone during the writing of the bom, Rigdon, Crowdrey, Harris and others were also around and had plenty of opportunities to have obtained the information - which is what I stated.
So, let me get your logic straight, the maps existed (in Boston, or London, or somewhere) and that proves Joseph smith had access to them, but the existence of other DNA in Lehi's party, and other parties they joined with means none of that DNA survived...
Wow, two strawmen in one. Those were likely available in America at libraries. Your DNA bleat was dealt with in post 651.
Can you show that a) Joseph actually had access (were they in a local library like 10 miles or less, as he would have been walking) and b) that he would have been able to read them (he had a third grade education, remember?)
LOL, what a lazy strawman. Smith’s own story states he was studing the bible at age 12 LOL, and as stated before smitty did not need to be the only one, his inner circle would have had plenty of opportunities on their own, so prove to me that the group didn’t have access.
There are none so deaf... Lurkers, you (as always) be the judge.
Lurkers, also listen to how the Yemeni official pronounces it – far clearer than the tribesman and it is Nehhem – not Nahom (or Nachom – the Jewish pronunciation)
GZ Surpisingly close to the tribal area name Nehem and agrees with Vogel’s investigation (Vogel, Dan, 2004, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet). The Yemen archaeologist pronounces it Nehhem. Again, this agrees with maps of the region. IN hebrew, the consonants "NHM" are pronounced as written, it should be pronounced with the H as hard, not soft (this is what we find in the hebrew "nahom" to be sorry"). So the sound would be like "ch" as in Scottish "loch" and we should expect to read of a bom placename of "Nachom, not "Nahom." The Book of Mormon placename doesn't fit the Hebrew word "to be sorry". However, as the video goes, the meaning shifts from “consolation” (hebrew) to “stone cutting” -
Some times words mean many things based on context. Many middle eastern languages are like this, as well as Asian ones.
I see you do not want to address this point as well. Not only is it been demonstrated that the name of the location is not Nahom – but Nehim or Nehhim, and not Nachom which would be closer to the Hebraic pronunciation. Furthermore, the meaning of the names are completely different.
You keep asking for people with degrees, and "specialists" The Guys on the tape are all specialists, why do you a geologist have a specialty in middle eastern languages and why should we trust you over them? (this seesm to be inconsistent behavior on your part),/I>
And you don’t either - The Yemen archaeologist pronounces it Nehhem. Again, this agrees with maps of the region and is counter to the desired mormon pronunciation. Quoted The South Arabian root NHM has to do with stone cutting whereas the Hebrew root has to do with consolation. See Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968), 636—37; and Joan Copeland Biella, Dictionary of Old South Arabic: Sabaean Dialect, Harvard Semitic Series No. 25 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1982), 296.
GZ So mormons interprete the word to mean sorrow, the locals say it means stone cutting.
It's two different languages, you know, I hope that languages often reuse the same sounds (because human speech is dependent on the human mouth) and these reused sounds often mean different things.
LOL, this is a hoot. According to the bom, lehi and company were traveling and avoiding any locals. The local that they encountered called the location “stone cutting/cutters”, yet mormons insist the locals called it “sorrow”. You yourself have just admitted that two different words are involved – therefore mormonism’s exclusive claim is not so solid LOL
Or maybe he heard the locals use their name and attached the maning that came from his native langauge to the name (as an english speaker who has learned chinese, this happens and is a good way to remember words for some people)
Or maybe the locals spoke Hebrew because this was a trading route...
Or (the more likely scenario) something else (that's the problem with "Maybe" you may be right, but probably not)
Or maybe the space aliens associated with Warren Aston told them. As already shown, the local dialect prounuces the word Nehhem (that’s the educated Yemen archaeologist). The Jews would have prounced it Nachom, with the hard H. The line of maybe’s is incredably laughable.
Once again Godzilla shooting foot then pointing at target... (It's two different languages...)
Thanks for proving my point – it is two different languages, with two different pronounciations and meanings – fancy that – and the local one is what it should be based upon – Nehhem – stone cutter. Mormons who speak at UFO conventions pervert the local name of the location.
Just like an anti, there's Forrest, and Rain, do you have anything to add? You were saying there was nothing to make a ship out of, I was talking about the trees...
So any forest that gets rain is a rainforest, lol, you may have scored well with math, but you must have failed geography LOL
GZ If one looks at the video, what is readily apparent are the lack of significant trees, trees large enough in size to permit the construction of boats large enough to sail the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
13 And upon all the cedars of Lebanon, that are high and lifted up, and upon all the oaks of Bashan, . . .
Best imitation of Godzilla's Voice:
I saw a video shot in Lebanon once There were no Cedars int he vido that I saw therefore the Bible is false...
Is this what really passes for Logic with you Godzilla?
So this is the only way that you can win your point is by placing words into my mouth that I have not said. Pretty lame strawman DU. There are cedars in Lebanon. There are no equivalent trees shown on the video you refered to. It was you who said I needed to watch the video as proof,/I>, so wheres the beef (trees). Given that you have shown yourself to be challenged when it comes to what a rainforest is, it is not suprising that you think the bushes and palm trees shown in the video clip pass as trees of a rainforest.
Actually, no, but people who have been up there said that it was iron and I think sulfur, anyway, that's what they said, me I just know what I heard.
Well, if it is a real iron ore deposit, you better get a claim on it
GZ Nephi brought no tools, so how is he going to 1) dig the ore if he could find it and 2) work the product before, during and after smelting – use his bare hands?
Moses Brought no damns with him, so how is he going to part thred sea?
And you go camping without tools? You travel for over a year without digging a latrine or a well, or anything (shovels of some kind?) IF you can't make tools without ore to mine ore, how exactly did ore ever get mined in the first place?
It would be very easy to show how ignorant you are at this point, but I’d rather let you continue – you are doing well enough on your own. I know later you will show all some of your homework regarding ancient smelting. So he has a “shovel” . How easy is it to dig in solid rock (where ores are found) with a late bronze age, early iron age shovel? How good is a shovel at cutting down trees? Just mull those camping questions a little.
Get the picture. So, he had to work hard, besides, remember, God was involved and with the Lord all things are possible.
Oh that is quite interesting, does that mean he was able to work the hot metal with his bare hands – you still have to have the correct tools DU.
9 And I said: Lord, whither shall I go that I may find ore to molten, that I may make tools to construct the ship after the manner which thou hast shown unto me? 10 And it came to pass that the Lord told me whither I should go to find ore, that I might make tools.
I’ll give you a little hint here DU for future research – if Nephi had the tools to work the iron already, he would not have needed tools to build the boats.
So, Godzilla, you're a geologist, if I put you in a mountainous area, and said find enough ore (any kind copper, iron, whatever) to make an adz, an axe and a saw You get common camping gear to work with and you have say three months are you going to tell me you couldn't come up with something? Let's say a million dollars was at stake and you have a film crew following you around to make sure you don't cheat by buying something.
That is such a laughable story DU. It clearly shows you have learned nothing about primitive smelting and mining - even with common camping tools (probably a shovel and a knife?) to dig into solid rock. You must think that milk comes from grocery stores.
<--Snipping out a bunch of insults again-->
LOL, I only said you were in over your head and drowning again on this subject – LOL get thicker skin or a better reason to annotate a snip.
DU Now, Bountiful is small enough that Nephi could have left and gone to the desert for the ore, and he could have melted it over a charcoal fire.
A pause to repost DU’s simpleton statement on how iron ore is smelted because now he presents some of his homework to prove that he is correct. Actually as we look at each you will see that in addition to failing to read the links/sources he still doesn’t understand the processes and materials necessary.
This is a very good site to research, and I relinked it above. As usual, DU continues to throw what ever and hope it sticks to the wall. This group works at reproducing iron smelting techniques used by Vikings – eighth to eleventh century AD. Thus they are using more advanced techniques and better materials than Nephi would (and has archaelolgically been proven) have in 600 BC. (1200 years earlier). Incase DU hadn’t noticed on the excellent photos and videos of their processes, some serious materials were used to process and handle the reduced iron. I would suggest that DU take a closer look at the tools needed for Viking era processing (greatly assisted by modern equipment) and tell me how many of them he takes when he goes camping? (yes, DU probably takes a small propane tank with him like pictured on the web site)
Joseph (living in the early 1800's) would have been way more familiar with Blacksmithing, and with primitive iron work, so this is not a proof that he was inspired, it's just more proof that you don't know what you are talking about. Even today, blast furnaces use Coal (Coke) to make steel,
My, how impressive. However, the processes of a blast furnance are far different from blacksmithing and primitive iron smelting. Secondly, your source goes to prove steel making didn’t get started until long after the nephites were alledgedly killed off (steel bows?????).
The earliest Smelting was done over Camp fires... Here is a quote for you:
The earliest evidence to date for the bloomery smelting of iron is found at Tell Hammeh, Jordan, and dates to 930 BC (C14 dating). However, based on the archaeological record of iron artifacts, it is clear that intentional reduction of iron metal from terrestrial ores, must have started near the end of the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1600–1150 BC). (I cut out the text that went to external links, go to the source to follow them.)
This is so incredable it shows the new lows that a mormon apologist will take to try to prove his point. First he states early smelting was done over campfires, then he quotes bloomery smelting – as if the two were linked. In reality, the quote associated with the camp fires title is related to this second paragraph - Probably the first smelting was done by accident by making a campfire on top of tin or lead ores. Such a combination may accidentally produce metallic tin and lead at the bottom of the campfire, as the temperatures to smelt tin and lead are easily obtained by an ordinary fire.. Intellectually dishonest DU. You will need to investigate bloomeries and their capabilities of the era – 600 BC – and not Viking methods and technology of 1200 years later.
Then you quote 2 Nephi 5:15 You are quoting from after the Got to the Americas, in Bountiful, it never says Iron, it says ore and tools: 1 Ne. 17:8-10
LOL, OK now we are scrambling over some other kind of ore. ROTFLAICGU. Make up your mind DU, what “metal” are we talking about here again?
DU You're the Geologist, is it possible to find metals (copper, nickel, iron, etc) in a setting like Bountiful and the surrounding mountains (Nephi said God showed him where to go in the mountains to find the ore, to Molten into tools.
GZ Oh is it? Evidence of those ores in mine able concentrations in a desert region would leave very clear remains of both the mining activity itself, as well as the ore processing and smelting. North Oman is a well known bronze age source of copper, but the area around so-called Bountiful was anything but in regards to mine able metals.
I Asked you your opinion as a gemologist, not stated a "fact" you then challenge me on my non statement, you're a funny guy
I’m not a gemologist but a professional geologist. Take a minute and read my last line again - , but the area around so-called Bountiful was anything but in regards to mine able metal . Got any other questions? Mormons are the ones needing to defend the bountiful site. If there are no ore bodies near by, there is no ore to make molten LOL. Let me put it to you really simply, there is nothing there to substantuate any useable (or even practical) level of iron reduction.
There should be a big difference between evidence for a mine that was used for generations and a one time build a saw type need for ore.
Because metals are a precious commodity, an ore body near an oasis would be prized and mined. Since is is alledgedly along a well used trail, metals smart people of the period (and sooner) would have identified these deposits near your rainforest and begun exploiting them, exactly like they did farther to the north as well as other places around the world.
As for the quotes about Iron in America, here Are some Archeology sites you may want to review before complaining about Iron in America...
Oh goodie – more of DU’s homework – I’m so glad he is getting outside of his promormon echo chamber
America's Mysterious Furnaces,
Well, the first thing I see here is copper, not iron. By an amateur archaeologist none the less. He specifically states no professional archaeologist has participated in his ‘findings’. From his big dig site, testing from two different methodlogies - thermoluminescence (TL) and radiocarbon dates both came out to 1740 AD. This age for this guy’s site is substantially younger than what Nephi would have been able to work with (by nearly 2000 years).
Native American Iron,
I won’t bother to link this source, please feel free to go back to DU’s link. This site is a blog where the guy claims to have found a furnance in limestone at a stratum below a layer containing pre-clovis rock tools (pre clovis period is approximately 15,000 years ago). Pre clovis is too old for nephi. What DU probably latched onto was the blogger’s claim that he found iron in this furnance. Had DU read further into the blog, on the second page is posted an email from a metallurgist whom the blogger sent several samples of the iron to for confirmation. Analysis came back that there there was no iron in the samples supplied to the metallurgist (on 2d page of blog), period. The only metal present was possibly lead.
Ancient Iron Ore Mine Discovered in Peruvian Andes,
An interesting National Geographic article. Does it support DU’s claim of iron mining and smelting in america? From the article - - "Vaughn and his colleagues are really the first to systematically look for the sources of clay and pigments used for Nasca pottery," Sorry to say, DU, this was for pigments (color) not smelting.
And Last Some quotes from Early American Iron Smelting:. . . .
Clearly your insistence that producing Iron requires "specialized Tools" is a reult of your opinion, not of the actuality of history.
Oh my, it is just my opinion now is it. For beginners, the little article above is dealing with colonial US – you know 1700s. That’s over 2000 years removed from Nephi’s little foray from bountiful. Now take a closer look at the article DU. It says but if black iron was needed, such as that used by blacksmiths, then a trip hammer mill was required where the pig could be heated and repeatedly pounded until the carbon balance in the iron made it pliable enough to be worked in one of the colonys' hundreds of blacksmith's shops. Here is a refrence to a specialized tool. BTW, I have a friend who does blacksmithing, so the methodlogy most likely employed by Nephi would be related to creating black iron (hint – look at the famous painting of Nephi supression his brothers rebellion). Camping gear indeed LOL.
GZ Bellows are incapable of raising the temperature to 2800 deg F
DU. Claerly, the Dark Ages Re-Creation Company disagrees with you on this, and they are after all experts in recreating this kind of stuff.
Actually if you bother to read the materials as the site, they only indicate that it is used to assist in the creation of bloom – needing only 1100 degrees C (2012 degrees F), far below the melting point of iron. And they are experienced in trying to recreate viking techniques of 800-1100 AD. Using in some cases propane that Nephi could have gotten refilled at the local village LOL.
So while Camping and cooking on the way to Nahom, they were buying cords of wood from vendors? Don't be stupid, they already had a way to cut wood. They already had a way to Dig. They had knives and they had everything needed to dig iron out and smelt it. Don't make me quote the Dark Ages Re-Creation Company. See, you made me link to the Dark Ages Re-Creation Company again, dang, I did it again.
Oh please cite for me how they mine iron ore from solid rock with their knives – LOL – please DU you are distroying any remaining credability you may have had. You may want to go back and really look at the tools they used to smelt iron from an ore. Propane bottles LOL. You may want to investigate the quality of the ore they were using too and while you are at it, is that ore present in the vicinity of bountiful. And remember, if this was along a frequently traveled route – IF it contained ore to permit nephi to smelt, others would have as well, and a metallurgical culture like existed a few hundred miles to the north would have existed.
I am very happy that you have left the mormon echo chamber to actually do some research on your own, you receive an E for effort, but overall content a D because you still don’t have a clue what you are trying to present (such as 1700’s technology versus 600BC).
That was my point, Anti's pontificate, Mormons post links, Anti's try to use the links we post to prove they were right all along, and without doing any of their own research, LOL!
DU, you simply don’t read your links to begin with. I only come along to show you that had you actually READ them to begin with, you would not have cited them in your support at the start. LOL, you are your own worst enemy at that
Gz Gee, ‘ol Woodward at Sorenson Genetics Inst., a mormon, conducts the studies as part of a team utilizing the DNA data his institute has collected over the years (you must have skipped over that part) which totally refutes Crandall (who BTW, was reinterpreting someone else’s data – tsk tsk)
Why should I repeat myself, you already got the part that he refutes Crandall’s analysis. You apparently can be trained.
This is funny, how many htreads have we been on together? On all of them you have never admitted defeat, kind of like here the Book of Mormon clearly precludes a DNA disproof, yet you claim one anyway. My proving you wrong is not dependent on your recognition that it has happened. Denial, it's not a river in Egypt.
I will pause here because as of the time you posted this, you apparently haven’t gotten to my reply at #651. Why should I admit defeat when I haven’t been defeated yet. You were shown to be clueless in #651 in your understanding of DNA tracking and you apparently openly refute you prophets.
It does not matter if you cite a hundred works all saying the DNA of the American Indians tested came from a single village in China, becasue the Book of Mormon does not claim the Americas was peopled excusively by any specific genetic marker set, so you will never prove it wrong that way, your base premise is wrong.
“When I was about 17 years old I saw another vision of angels in the night season after I had retired to bed I had not been asleep, … all at once the room was illuminated above the brightness of the sun an angel appeared before me … he said unto me I am a messenger sent from God, be faithful and keep his commandments in all things, he told me of a sacred record which was written on plates of gold, I saw in the vision the place where they were deposited, he said the Indians were the literal descendants of Abraham (The Papers of Joseph Smith, Vol. 2, Journal, 1832-1842, edited by Dean C. Jessee, Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, copyright 1992 Corporation of the President, pp. 69-70). Now if I remember DU, wasn’t this Smith guy involved in writing this bom and wasn’t this angel character the same that lead him to the gold plates? What is there about the prophet? “I sense a great spirit of gratitude for this new temple,” remarked President Hinckley. “The Saints have waited a very, very long time.” He continued: “It has been a very interesting thing to see the descendants of Father Lehi in the congregations that have gathered in the temple. So very many of these people have the blood of Lehi in their veins, and it is just an intriguing thing to see their tremendous response and their tremendous interest.” (Remarks at the dedication of the Guayaquil, Ecuador temple, reported in “News of the Church,” Ensign, Oct. 1999, p. 74)
Lurkers – this has been the message of the mormon church for 170 some years – a message their missionaries have been taught to use with Amerindian peoples here as well as Polynesia – and they all point to the bom to justify their message. DU desires to obfuscate this point deliberately so he doesn’t need to address what the first and next to last prophet have clearly stated about the Amerindians – they are descendants of Abraham through Lehi – a Jew. And even on the simplest of levels, being a descendant of someone indicates a genetic link.
As for repudiating Keith crandall's work, all he said was that if you want to look for evidence of Lehi's DNA, the mynas is the right place to start looking. He did not say it was conclusive evidence.
Lets cut the lie DU, Crandall said the following from the video –
The most recent DNA evidence that I’ve seen, in terms of peopling of the Americas, shows this Middle Eastern haplotype at greatest frequencies in the Mayan people; so if that’s your perception of where Lehi and company set up shop then the DNA evidence would be consistent with that.
He says this haplotype is Middle Eastern and occurs in the Mayan people. That is specifically stating that it is present – not may be – not possibly – not hoped to be – but present . If you have any doubt Crandall also said there “are Middle Eastern haplotypes where we as Latter-Day Saints would expect them to be in this Mayan population, as opposed to across all North and South America.”
Now, if you desire to continue to misrepresent what Crandall said – by all means do so, but readers and Lurkers here will see a pattern of deception – since you are the one touting the videos as support. For those who want a non anti or pro mormon decision on the presence of middle eastern and hebraic haplotypes in the Americas, please go to this site and you can download a copy of the peer-reviewed study that specifically addresses the haplotypes DU/Crandall claims are present in the mayans haplogroup X. , Please note the participation of Scott Woodward, director of the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation, Salt Lake City. Additional summaries of the process of using DNA studies to identify the origion of the Amerindians can also be found here. And a more technical paper can be found on this link. Add this to the National Geographic Genome project website I have posted time and time again, one will quickly see that Crandall is blowing smoke on his claim regarding the presence of Middle eastern Haplotypes. Gee, DUh, he must not be listening to your arguments on the genetic purity strawman. The mayans have been studied anthropologically and archaeologically for over 100 years and absolutely no linkage to the Old World and particularly the middle east have ever been found.
GZ What independent research or study outside FARMS have you set forth in your defense (crickets. . . crickets . . . . crickets . . . crickets).
Who CARES! Where are the muslim studies backing up the Bible?
Where are the Jewish studies supporting Jesus and his ascention?
OF COURSE the studies supporting the Book of Mormon come first and formost from the church and Momrons, what moron would expect people to research and write things supporting a religion they don't believe in.. Oh, sorry about that.
I did not ask why these others are specifically studying to prove the bible (just can’t get away from dissing it can you?). But if Middle Eastern DNA is present – as Crandall openly claims in the videos, there should be a lot of independent DNA studies to back him up, they do not have to be supporting the bom – if the data proves middle eastern DNA to be present in the mayans – where are those peer reviewed studies? (crickets). Hey, I got an idea, why doesn’t Crandall write up these other peoples work and support the claim in a professional publication !!!!
GZ GZ This is the kind of source spoken of by Sorenson:
DU I'll skip your quote since it's just an ad homonym attack on Mormons (suprise!)
Fellow FReepers, here is that quote again –
First, they train the reader that serious, critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis. Second, the reader gets the false impression that all is well in Zion, that the outside world is being forced to the LDS point of view, and that the only role LDS scholars need play in Book of Mormon-related studies is to use scissors and paste effectively. Third, the underlying complexity and subtlety of the Book of Mormon are masked by a pseudo-scholarship to which everything is simple. (John L. Sorenson, “Instant Expertise on Book of Mormon Archaeology,” BYU Studies 16:3 (Spring, 1976), p. 429.)
The reader will please note that John Sorenson is a mormon and the statement is directed to mormons. If anything, this speaks to the level of scholarship shown here so far. Any source of information such as UFO related sites, no matter how unreliable, DU condemns my standard of seeking peer-reviewed professional journals, yet one need only compare the reliability of those journal articles - which are forced to meet an exceptionally high standard – to some of the sources DU seeks his defense from. And just by linking to a web site as DU doe, thinking it has defeated my point – he fails to read the content of that site, resulting in his point being disproven instead.
The way you run Quotes and attacks together leaves me unsure where one starts and the other ends, I'm just not going to play that Game.
See, by rejecting a fellow mormon scientist’s rebuke, DU is portraying exactly what Sorenson is repudiating. One only need to review this post and DUs that I am answering to see the shallowness of the scientific defense being presented. DU gives more credit to a no name indidual that speaks to UFO conventions than to scientists who have conducted this work like Woodward and others. A mile wide and a half-inch deep. This will probably get cut out again, but it will never go away.
GZ But these horse/tapir arguers are the mormon apologists themselves, LOL. Horses were VERY common in Israel 600 BC DU. And as the simple phot comparison shows, even a kid can see the difference.
In this thread I linked you to Pictures of horse, Carvings of Horsea and ArcheologicalCarbon dated skeletons of horses, you reject them all nad act like "See there is no evidence" see your intellectual dishonesty comments above, and go look in the mirror.
What links DU? You sent me to a website operated by a mormon who part times as his own great research foundation. Any source of information, no matter how unreliable.
Drowning, then i'm half of an inch deep, then i'm sinking in the 1/2 inch deep water. Wow, I don't think I could mess upa metapho that bad if I tried...
Again, you cut the link, because you don't like what it says Horses and The Book of Mormon,
Again they spout about the Lol Tun Caves where two fossilized teeth with pottery dated at 2300 BC. In The Cambridge History of the NativePeoples of the Americas, Vol 2: Mesoamerica(By Bruce G. Trigger, Wilcomb E. Washburn, Richard E. W. Adams, Murdo J. MacLeod, Frank Salomon, Stuart B. Schwartz, Published by Cambridge University Press, 2000) Indicates that more has been added since the now old investigations and make this statement ”Currently, only one site in Mesoamerica supports the hypothesis of human occupation in lowland environments before 12,000 years ago. In the Puuc Hills of northern Yucatan, the lowest levels of excavations reported by R. Velazquez at Loltun Cave have produced some crude stone and bone tools along with the remains of horse, mastodon, and other now extinct Pleistoncene mammals. . . . No radiocarbon dates have been forthcoming for this proposed early component that underlies later ceramic occupations. On the basis of stone tool typology and faunal association, MacNeish has proposed that the lower levels of Loltun Cave are somewhere between 40,000 and 15,000 years old.”
In Ice Age Cave Fauna of North America(By Blaine W. Schubert, Jim I. Mead, Russell W. Graham, Denver Museum of Nature and Science Edition: illustrated Published by Indiana University Press, 2003) it reports on more detailed studies conducted 1977-1981. It identifies the stratum containing the horse teeth (E. conversidens – Pliestocene horse) restricted to Pleistocene strata and Pleistocene only (since you are a non-geologist DU, that period is about 1.8 million to 10,000 years ago). BTW, this book covers the 1977 exploration Maxwell institute comments on (in absolutely no detail) that recovered more horse fragments, from the Pleistocene strata (older than 10,000 years).
Just like with the Lackish letters, your apologists are using out dated (and incomplete) sources for their information.
Second, on the Site I linked contains the following Quote "according to an email he sent to the Associated Press he confirmed he was excommunicated him for "having an inappropriate relationship with a woman," You are correct, he had his affair while a bishop, not a BYU professor, still not a way to stay in the church. You might also be interested in his initial reason fro Doubting the church, According to This document His first dissatisfaction was with the churches support for the Flood which he does not think happened...
Pretty big brush you want to paint people with DU. Inappropriate behavior does not equal adultry. His DC tried to pin adultry on him, but failed. He stated “ I then quoted from the LDS General Handbook of Instructions where it says that a DC MUST be held for apostasy and MAY be held for adultery. “. So if you want to continue the accusation, be known that it was not supported by the DC, so you are lying about him (unless you were there at the time). I checked my copy of the general handbook, inappropriate behavior is not included. He offered to be excommunicated on the charge of apostasy – but mormons seem to have this fixation on trying to tag the adultry tag as much as they can – legitimately or not. So keep lying about his charge DU, only speaks volumes to the DC kangroo court system and its integrity (or lack thereof).
You should go read Simon's letter, you'd like it...
I have, and he was trying to support the bom, but the scientific data would not support his thesis. Now I guess he could have blown smoke as Crandall has on video. Perhaps this is why Crandall toes the line: I am sure that some are comforted in their belief by the thought that scientists at BYU are not troubled. Area leaders have probably reassured my family and other members that because faithful scientists at BYU know about the DNA research, all is well. They probably didn’t mention that since the Church owns BYU it can control what its staff say or publish. Members who criticize the Church or its teachings at BYU face being sacked and excommunicated. Scholars paying too close attention to the details of Church history have been severely repressed in recent years. The same censorship of scientists has occurred before in BYU’s history and it will happen again. In the heartland of Mormonism the consequences of this action can be devastating for an individual, who could find themselves unemployed and an outcast in his family and community. Many scientists have learned that the best way to deal with these difficult issues is to not deal with them. Some keep Church and science safely locked in separate mental compartments and never attempt to resolve any conflicts. They reason that they have the eternities to resolve these conflicts. I must have been doing this myself to a certain degree. It disappoints me greatly to see the Mormon Church hiding behind academics at BYU. I wonder how many of those academics harbor real concerns about the Church but are afraid to speak out. In most cases educational institutions have helped open the eyes of the masses, but BYU is being used to prop up Mormonism as its scholars revise history and defend the books of scripture attributable to Joseph Smith.
Really, so by stating "Hey if this is what you want to look for this is a good place to look", he misused a study ROTFLOL!
Your spin on what Crandall has said has already been refuted by Crandall’s own words above – continue to promulgate a lie is not honest DU.
And we know this How? When exactly did they go extinct? Oh, It's the lack of evidence thing, we don't have evidence you know, except for some bones that carbon date to the right time, you know, except for those. Oh and the Paintings of horses that predate Columbus, oh and the carvings of horses (I linked to all this stuff previously on this thread)
Uh perhaps because they are no longer around – you think DUh. They are not present in strata of more recient sediments Du. It is kinda easy for Peterson and Tvednes to sit an pontificate without citing any specific report – why anything goes. Paintings are also associated with neandertal man – does that make him a nephite? If the case was so open and shut that horses (and elephants, oxen and asses) existed, why then has FARMS contributed so much work to reinterpreting them as tapirs!!!! LOL, you own apologists are lost using old data that has been reevaluated many times over – and now does not support their assertions. Or the Chapman Research Group – your horse link - impressive sounding name, until one finds that the author is a mormon physicist and has done no primary research in the subjects, only copied and compiled other stories. Not a real vertabrate palontology or zoology or similar publication but a site but by an amateur citing out of date materials and conclusions refuted by later studies and discoveries. This is a psudoscholarly site that only quote mines and does no origional research. Just like Sorenson said any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable
Godzilla, has evidence ever been found that was lacking before? Has "new Evidence" ever changed Archeological theory? (this is why "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" we have not found everything we are going to find yet.)
Unless you have something to offer, I am not currently aware of any that fit that mould.
I have never been dishonest, I have been witty, engaging and logical.
We will see if you continue the lie about Southernton and deny what Crandall said.
GZ Wrong again, Paul is reciting eyewitness testimony.
Joseph Smith is reciting eyewitness testimony, but you reject that...)
Paul had other people there when it happened to colloberate the event as well as Ananias. Smith’s history consists of at least 9 conflicting accounts in his own words. His story changes like a boy caught lying.
You fail to edit this section in a manner that can be understood, please try again.
GZ And the archaeological proof is in the documents those eyewitnesses wrote and were preserved to tell of those events.
the journals of those present, the church records, people were miraculously preserved to tell the tale... Oh, wait, They are Mormons and not credible.
Interesting, so why is the 1844 version better than the one he wrote by his own hand in 1832, rather than the scribe who did the 1844 one? Or his account in 1835 Messenger and Advocate? Oh wait, he had to float a number of trial balloons to see which one the people thought was correct.
You know, there si an old saying fool me once, shame on you fool me twice shame on me. To put it flatly, I don't believe you. Let's say I come up with a piece of stone and some Mormons who having done research say it's where Jesus stood when addressing the Ancient Americans.
Then I would say lets put it to the test – was the artifact handled correctly, can it pass the same level of scrutiny that other archaeological artifacts in Israel are held to? If one stone has been found, there would in all likely hood be the ruins of an entire city. Kinda hard for archaeologists to ignore don’t cha think?
I would be willing to bet that the first hing you would do is look up on the internet to see if any of them can be associated with UFOs, next you would see if thay have any skeletons in their closets, Next you would ask if any non Mormons have done any studies on the stone, and of course there won't be any why would there be? Failing finding anything to impugn the character of the men and women supporting this stone as the one Jesus Stood on, I believe you would then say, well, it's just a bunch of Mormons trying to protect their pathetic religion, they don't count... and having dismissed all evidence you would again claim that there was none.
As I said above, then that research should be able to bear up under scrutiny given similar artifacts in Israel and elsewhere. If I impune anything – it is the scholarship (and lack thereof) of those individuals. Is the evidence you described what you want, or does Sorenson’s words mean anything any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable. You are familiar with the term GIGO. A claim as remarkable as you hypothesis would turn the world up side down if it were verified. People who accept at “face value” are commonly fools. How would thay prove it DU??? Possibly from the discovery of the associated city, hebraic/egyptian writings and the like that can be dated to 33AD. However, if you say “yonder over there is a guy who prayed about it and God told him Jesus set foot on that der boulder – well such would not fare well under even the most minimal review now wouldn’t it.
Why? This has been your pattern all along.
I repudiate your assessment. I have wanted your (parroted) claims documented externally to meet the same standards required by critics of the Bible and Christianity. You repeatly want you evidences accepted at face value and exempt from the same examination. What did I say earlier about those who accept things at face value.
I ask you, how many Muslims do research backing up "Christian" history. . . .
DU, you are blissfully unaware of the numbers of atheists and persons in other religions that are bible scholars today. Most archaelogical finds that have bearing on the Bible and Christianity today in Israel today are by – Jewish and Arab scientists- not Christian. The bible does quite well that way because it contains a history that can be documented and verified by those artifacts - regardless who found them DU.
Science works by people observing, and coming up with theories that they believe could be true, and then trying to find evidence to support their theory. No scientist is looking for evidence to support theories he believes to be wrong, now sometimes they find it anyway and if they do, and if the evidence is strong enough they may change their view, they may become a convert to that theory.
I cut my teeth geologically with the arguments and debates between the plate tectonists and the vertical geologic factions. Data comes in, conceptual models change, theories improve while others eventually wither away because newer data no longer supports them. Those who seek to find evidence to support their theory usually do not fare well when their theories are reviewed by their peers – hence the filtering effect of peer review – to eliminate those kinds of theories. But lets talk theories – they have to fit observable phenomena. Lack of evidence to support a theory is invalid on that basis alone. They also explain and predict based upon the observable phenomena. What observable phenomena can mormons point to that also accounts for all the other observable phenomena. For example, the conceptual model for the geology at a critical dam site provided predictive functions regarding a key marker layer in the sediment. When this layer was discovered to be severely disturbed in one area of the subsurface exploration, the model and theory about the geology had to be adjusted to fit the new set of observable data – that a right lateral fault zone was passing through that area. This said – theories predict. I am aware of at least four theories of where the bom lands are. Can they predict anything? Well since there are four of them, suggest that the observable data is very vague. As such they really don’t qualify as a theory. The bom claims to represent the history of amerindians – complete with large cities, developed culture that is completely different from the classical indians. If true all these artifacts I keep pressing for should be present in great abundance. Since not one valid archaeological find in the new world is present to nail down the bom lands – there are four theories including polynesia of all places. Theory – able to explain and predict based upon the observable phenomena. So where is the observable phenomena?
There are another group of scientists, ones that I believe to be illegitimate, these scientists have no original Ideas, and all they do is try to poke holes in existing theories and invalidate data. These scientists present no findings of their own, but serve the purpose of fact checking those who might be a bit over zealous in their theories.
There may be those, but you hit on the concept of peer review – checking those who may be overzealous in their interpretation of the data and theories. I had to face a review of my thesis to insure my data supported my theory. Nothing different.
It is totally illegitimate to say htat a theory or a religion can't be true because there is no support from those who don't believe in that religion. Of course there isn't. To sum up, If the evidence that has been laid before you is not enough for you to wonder, then I believe if Jesus Christ came to you tonight and told you that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the one and only true church on the face of the earth today; I believe that you would find reasons not to believe him.
The evidence you have placed before me barely even reaches the definition thereof. You do not take your evidence seriously because as you always say, the only way to find truth is to pray and some undefined, amorphic experience will occur. The only thing that makes me wonder is how educated people can check their brains in at the door of such a religion.
The History of the US and most of the Western Culture is that of Christianity, If we did not know more of the middle eastern happenings and history then we do about the Americas which are larger and more recently discovered, then would be a sorry bunch of Christians indeed. I have been to churches in Israel that have been there for centuries. They are an archeological fact because the locations have never been abandoned and lost to history. So what. There are still plenty of atheists who don't believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Archeology is a lousy reason to believe in a religion.
I agree, archaelogy by itself is inadequate. But if the bible says that such and such happened here – and guess what – that here isn’t a real place, what does that do to the faith in the book? According to the bom – the americas were continually occupied at least from 600 BCish. New info on the mayan culture show a developed culture that extends to about 1000 BC, and later, complete with writing and developed architecture. It as not been abandoned and lost to history. The limited geography theory places bom smack dab in the middle of this culture. Theory should predict bom artifacts and cross “contamination” with the maya culture. Neither have been found. Observable data – mayan culture development not affected by a hebraic, advanced metallurgical, culture of white men. A hebraic culture that numbered in the millions (according to the bom) and it is as if it never existed to the mayans – a culture that sized would have gotten noticed DU.
I hope you are aware that the Muslims have lots of archeology to support Islam. The Dome of the Rock was built over the rock that Mohamed "ascended to heaven" from. They can "show you the Rock" so are you going to believe in their religion now?
Yes, I am aware of that mythology, however remember that story is based upon a dream for starters. The Jews have a better documented claim that the temple existed there. Take the time to read the myth about the dome of the rock and then tell me how the presence of the temple mount fufills it.
Mormons are Christian (by the definition of the Bible and Because Jesus says we are)
I disagree entirely, but that is a point for another thread.
. Mormons are the only ones trying to support the Book of Mormon, it only stands to reason that Mormons will be the only ones with supporting studies for the Book of Mormon.
Who is funding the Jews and Arabs making the discoveries in Israel? ? ? If the archaelogical evidence is there, the many scientific groups looking at archeology in central america (or which ever bom model you fancy), should find artifacts that will either support or deny the bom model - regardless! Negative evidence is evidence if all other evidence points to another solution that fits the observable data.
You know, that's not what i got when I read their letter, they did say that parts of it had been validated by archeology, but I didn't get that they "use the Bible" to plan expeditions. YMMV They would probably have said the same thing about the Koran, so?
The bible is accepted as an accurate history over that of other middle eastern cultures DU – go back and read that part again. Can the same be said for the Koran? Is that said in the attached Smithsonian letter regarding the bom – no, just the opposite. They take no stand in the religious interpretations, but when it comes to fitting the artifact/discovery into context – it is the bible they reach for.
So? Have you ever been to the Mountain Buddha studied on? I have, Did you know they have Archeology Going back to before Christ too? IMHO archeology is not a good way to measure a religion, but if that is where you want to put your faith, hey far be it for me to stop you, I will point out that to me tha's the "arm of flesh" not the "arm of God" but whatever you want to believe, knowck yourself out!
Zarahemla was suppose to have been occupied for hundreds of years, but there is no real evidence of it ever existing. Why don't archeologists theorize Hebrew or Egyptian linkages or influences in Mesoamerica? Because in all the hundred years and more of exploration and investigations they have found NONE. And as I said – the bom claims to be inspired by God as a history of the Americas. Your prophets from smith on have taught that there was a vast culture that existed across america (at least) and that the Amerindians are directly descended from Lehi – a Jew. I don’t recall any buddist writings making similar claims. Bom does.
First, you don't know what I have seen or know. Second Joseph smith is an eyewitness tof the risen savior. Third, no one was "present " when Jesus was resurrected, they simply, elegantly, found the tomb empty.
Fine, but no one was there to collaborate smitty’s “eyewitness” and his written testimony of 9 conflicting accounts suggests he is making the thing up, like a kid caught in a lie. Finally, the women were eyewitnesses of the resurrected Jesus shortly after the stone was moved away – empty tomb, encounter risen Saviour - check your bible out better.
OK, if I say, Hey, if you want to dig for Buried treasure, Florida is a good place to start. How in the name of all that is funny do you repudiate that? That is what Keith Crandall said. He did not say there is treasure in florida, he said if that was what you wanted to look for, that was a Good place to start.
Crandall’s misrepresentation and what he actually said were dealt with earlier, I refer the lurker to check above.
OK, GZ, I went and looked at your "study", and as I said before, it has no bearing on the truthfulness of the Book of mormon. Haplogroups D4h3 and X2a could very well have come from where the stidies say they do (I really have no dog in that hunt and Don't care).
Crandall based his claim that the haplogroups identified with the mayans proved the bom. This study (along with the many others you have ignored) shows him to be wrong. The haplogroup X he pointed to from the Rosenberg study has been shown not to be associated with the old world at all, completely opposite of what Crandall claimed.
Because these people they tested were descendents of some of the groups I am sure the Nephites and or Lamanites met and Joined with. The Nephites were the smaller group, and their DNA is from Joseph not Judah, their DNA when found ing the study will not be a majority, they will be the exception, the Junk that is "filtered out".
Do I need to cite your prophets doctrinal interpretation of the bom again? And I won’t put you DNA knowledge down further since I showed you your erroneous interpretatons in post #651.
The book of momron does not claim that the American Indians were descended from only or even majorly from Middle eastern Jews, which is the thing anti's are trying to say proves the Book of Mormon wrong, and it's just not claimed by the Book of Momron.
When I was about 17 years old I saw another vision of angels in the night season after I had retired to bed I had not been asleep, … all at once the room was illuminated above the brightness of the sun an angel appeared before me … he said unto me I am a messenger sent from God, be faithful and keep his commandments in all things, he told me of a sacred record which was written on plates of gold, I saw in the vision the place where they were deposited, he said the Indians were the literal descendants of Abraham (The Papers of Joseph Smith, Vol. 2, Journal, 1832-1842, edited by Dean C. Jessee, Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, copyright 1992 Corporation of the President, pp. 69-70, emphasis added).
“I sense a great spirit of gratitude for this new temple,” remarked President Hinckley. “The Saints have waited a very, very long time.” He continued: “It has been a very interesting thing to see the descendants of Father Lehi in the congregations that have gathered in the temple. So very many of these people have the blood of Lehi in their veins, and it is just an intriguing thing to see their tremendous response and their tremendous interest.” (Remarks at the dedication of the Guayaquil, Ecuador temple, reported in “News of the Church,” Ensign, Oct. 1999, p. 74)
These are you prophets and in one case, the angel moroni making the statements DU. Are you calling them “anti’s” now? Those statements clearly mean that more than the majority was descended from middle easterners.
Great! So what? They can only map the movement of a group, not the movement of individuals, when they can take a sample of my blood and tell me the names of all my ancestors, call me. other wise they might just miss Lehi, if they even test one of his descendents...
Contact Sorenson Labs, they specialize in that. Your prophets teach from the bom that that couple dozen or so founded all the Amerindians here and those founders were claimed to be middle eastern DU – you can put 2 and 2 together.
Actually, it is required, the Lemba people who were traced by Keith Crandall kept their Male line pure and that was why they were able to trace them back.
They are black and took african wives. Since you prophets teach that the Amerindians are direct discendants of Lehi (and Abraham), that indicates that there should be plenty of jewish mtDNA as well as Y to go around.
Get it? The Book of mormon says they started out intermarrying right off the bat with slaves and anyone else thay met.
I can only look to the teachings from your prophets which openly taught for the past 170+ years that the Amerindians are descendant of Lehi and Abraham. That leaves very little room for your interpretation.
Gee, if my grasp of Geology is as bad as my grasp of Early Iron smelting, and my understanding of Population Genetics, maybe I should have your job... Cause I'm spanking you on both of them!!! LOL!
DU you have a grasp of neither, because by this time as you get here in your reply you will be embarrassed by your lack of knowledge.
Actaully, he was rubbing the straw man nature of the whole thing in the faces of those dumb enough to believe that you can prove a negative with a corrupted DNA sample that's over 2,000 years dilute. LOL!
Your issues with the ‘corrupted’ sample was refuted by your own words and the full definition of the issue in post #651. I trust that by the time you get here you have reformed your thinking.
The proof is in the pudding my FRiend, you don't know as much as you think you do about Iron Smelting, Bog Iron, DNA, the Book of Momron, and or programming. I have been nading you your teeth this whole time and it's been a lot of fun. but the postulate that you just put out was funny! LOL! (in colledge it's Computer Science, which makes me a Scientist and you a Sanitary engineer by comparison.
Oh, so Nephi found bog iron now did he – LOL and you are an expert in iron smelting now just because you melted some metal and poured it into a mold as well as found viking recreators smelting iron (with the assistance of propane – an essential camping item). BTW, I was writing programs using batch cards for mainframes probably before you were born.
ROTFLOL! He's BAITING you. He never said there was any proof of Jewish DNA, he said "hey if you want to look, look over there
I’ll repeat it again incase you didn’t get it the first time. The very first thing Crandall says on this youtube video is–
The most recent DNA evidence that I’ve seen, in terms of peopling of the Americas, shows this Middle Eastern haplotype at greatest frequencies in the Mayan people; so if that’s your perception of where Lehi and company set up shop then the DNA evidence would be consistent with that.
He says this haplotype is Middle Eastern and occurs in the Mayan people. That is specifically stating that it is present – not may be – not possibly – not hoped to be – but present . He says in not once, not twice but THREE times IIRC. If you have any doubt Crandall also said there “are Middle Eastern haplotypes where we as Latter-Day Saints would expect them to be in this Mayan population, as opposed to across all North and South America.” Science is a specific language – contrary to mormon apologetics. There are no maybe’s, possibles or could be, he flat out said this IS a middle eastern haplotype and it occurs in the mayan people.
I am assuming that as a professional, in his expertise that he understands at least as much as I do. On the other hand you are beginning to make me doubt that assement of "professionals"... LOL!
First, they train the reader that serious, critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis.
Limited Geography has nothing to do with it. The Lamanites and the Nephites both married in larger groups of people that were not from Jerusaslem, so DNA results from elsewhere is to be expected.
Every group mentioned in the bom originated from Israel or its immediate environs. Or did you miss Crandall’s remark about middle eastern DNA as well as the doctrinal interpretation of the bom by your prophets stateing the Amerindians are descendants of Lehi (from the middle east – fancy that). I can hear Howard Cosell saing some one stop this slaughter – DU is being turned into hamburger.
Limited geography (non) theory has everything to do with it. Unable to prove the bom lands are else where, they seek to find a location and story that in its essence denies the prophetic teachings of mormonism for the last 170 years. How fruitfull has this theory been DU – where is the evidence?
Actually, you don't understand this at all, it does not matter if they intermarried and spread across the land or stayed in a small area, ithikn the Book ofMomorn is vague about it and probaly some discussions were about small areas some were about large areas and God does not care to fulfill your curiosity about which and where.
DU, do you not believe your prophets from Smith on? You don’t believe the angel??? By now you are probably sick of the citation – but they have exercised the authority in this matter and consistently taught just the opposite – even by claim of smith from the angel moroni. Either your thinking is right, the prophets are right if you want to remain in mormonism.
a lot or redunacy by Du
Let me give you a "better" quote to make your case with: My brothers and sisters, you belong to a great race. Your father is Joseph who was sold into Egypt, the virtuous man who went to prison rather than yield to the seduction of a queen. Your father was Jacob, the father of twelve sons. You came through one of them. One of the great prophets of all times, your father, was Isaac. Another great prophet, your father, was Abraham, than whom there were no greater ones. Abraham was a great man who walked and talked with God. He is your father back those many generations. Be proud of him and know that you are of royal blood; with your royal blood you can achieve, rising to the top.
Please note that even in this quote, President Kimball does nto say they are Pure descendents, just descendents, and that fits what the Book of Momon says to a T
Basics of DNA DU – those mtDNA and Y chromosonal markers – remember the real definition from the Nat’l Geo site – they do not get mixed up as the rest of the DNA does (that’s why they are called markers) there should be an abundance of middle eastern DNA if they are descended from Abraham et.al.
They are literal descendents, just not exclusively descended from. Apparently you don't understand the diffrence.
Definition – Literal. Exactly following the order or meaning of the origional word or text; adhearing strictly to the basic meaning of the origional word; a word used to emphasize tht something is true. Aparently the angel meant some of the descendants.
GZ President Gordon B. Hinckley
So? It's not saying what you want it to say, surely over 2,000 years they all have some link to these men, but that does not mean it will be tracable becasue of the many others who they are also descended from.
DU, hopefully you have studied the use of the haplogroup genetics and realized that when you prophets have made these statements that are saying ALL those being spoken to are descendants – they will carry those unchanging genetic markers and can be readily identified through them. I set your genetics straight in post #651 so I don’t expect further response to this nonsense.
I have an Idea, Lets "do the Math" on how many ancestors they could have.
DU in your unwitting manner you completely undercut the whole argument of the nephi culture to begin with. Millions of nephites were killed over the course of the bom period – you’ve just shown that there is no physical way they could have procreated fast enough to obtain those numbers in the short period of time. Thank you for your contribution to disprove the bom.
GZ If it is the Prophet – then FARMS is lying about the inability to find middle eastern (even hebrew) DNA markers in the amerindian population of the Americas.
I often am amazed at the willingness of Anti's to call others liars, I wonder why that is so easy for you to believe of others? But Nope they are not lying either.
Ah congnitive dissoance I see. FARMs limited geography model limits the bom lands to a small area in central america (which just happened to already be occupied by mayan – a small complication) with its own hill Cumorah – fancy that, now there are two hill cumorahs! The prophets teach from the bom that the bom lands encompassed the vast majority of North America. These models are not mutually compatable. This is why there are four different models out there. So where is the proof DU?
They all are... and I don't think I said Spirtual truth is supirior to physical truth.
DU DU DU, hello – aren’t you the one always advocating that prayer to provide an as yet to be defined, amorphus physical reaction was the only way to truth???
Actually, that is your supposition throughout this htread and no matter how many times you dress up tha Cannard and send it out, it's still a straw man argument. I cannot and will not defend what I don't believe, namely that the Book of Mormon says that the Indians are the exclusive progeny of Lehi's group. We just have never held that belief.
Go back to Smith’s encounter with moroni DU – you are playing with words. Literal means literal and if they have the blood of Abraham and Lehi flowing through them, they will have the genetic markers as well. You are misrepresenting mormonism on this DU, that belief has been held throughout its history. You gave me an expanded portion of Kimball’s “Of Royal Blood”, now let me return the favor and see if he agrees with you or not -
And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea (“Of Royal Blood,” Ensign, July 1971, p. 7,)
of all is both a literal and exclusive term DU. Or does byu professor nix that doctrinal teaching from the bom by the former prophet?
GZ Prejudged? Who called independent science studies crap? Not me. BH Roberts examined the bom with an open mind – and concluded that it was a work of fiction.
The reason they are crap is that unless we drink your kool-aid and agree thet the Book of Mormon doesn't say what it clearly says, or we have to violate the laws of science so that the purity of a sample does not figure into what you can extract from it, then we might be able to come to the same erronious conclusion you have jumped to.
DU’s inaccurate fixation was refuted in post 651. Apparently DU is unable to get his head around the fact that mormon historian and apostle (IIRC) BH Roberts concluded the bom was a myth, invented by Smith and his inner circle. First, they train the reader that serious, critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis.
That all depends on the definition of "Real Publication", and that's just not up to you either.
First, they train the reader that serious, critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis.. Psssst, its called peer reviewed journals and articles in the professonal world.
I'm not, but the Spaniards called them swords, so why couldn't joseph or Moroni call them swords? (Oh yeah, It dosen't fit the anti the model)
LOL, these are things Nephi and others were suppose to have made like unto laban’s sword – you are telling me that the sons of nephi whom he taught to work metal would stick obsidian on a stick and call it a sword when they were taught otherwise (cue sorenson quote)
Here is a Road Ancient Ohio's Great Hopewell Highway, as I pointed out, you won't find these in the Smithsonian, becasue as an institution it is bound to be part of the flat earth society when it comes to changing the orthodox view of history in the Americas.
Well that is interesting, is ohio now part of central america?????? Didn’t think so. Is the Hopewell culture match an advanced hebraic worshiping culture – no. AFA the road is concerned – where are the hopewell wheeled chariots? critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis.
So of course the "Round Earth" anti establishment stuff will have UFOs and other stuff going on by people who are not afraid to step outside the "box" or go over the horizon. Here is a site you'll love, About.com Paranormal Phenomena, it lists a whole bunch of stuff and yes, on page two, the Los Lunas Decalogue stone.
I’ve commented plenty on worthless sites like this, so has sorenson - critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis.
Having had horses, I am qualified to recognize one, thanks.
Good, the image of you riding a tapir would be unsettling – if not outrageously funny.
So now people living here for 2,000 years could not have ever developed smelting because they started with their bare hands? I'd love to see the site where the first humans recieved tools from Aliens (since we could never build anything without tools)
Remember, These guys? Dark Ages Re-Creation Company
Yes, and take a look again as the tools required for viking age smelting. Propane tanks and all.
DU What, with your taxonomy? Of course not! The Book of Mormon does talk about the Jaridites and others that they met here.
GZ All killed except for Coriantumr, unless you want to make you prophets out to be liars.
The others were all killed? I must have missed that verse. Please link me to the verse on the Book of Momon where everyone but Lehi's descendents are killed... (Crickets)
DU, I thought your were the bom expert. Coriamature was a jaredite, not lehi LOL. You need to get a little more sleep bro, getting your mythology mixed up.
GZ President Hinckley recognized the Book of Mormon heritage of his listeners in Lima: “As I look into your faces, I think of Father Lehi, whose sons and daughters you are. I think he must be shedding tears today, tears of love and gratitude. … This is but the beginning of the work in Peru. This work of the Almighty will go on and grow and grow.” (“God’s Holy Work” in Peru, in “News of the Church,” Ensign, Feb. 1997, 73). Who do you believe, your prophet or BYU scholars?
Are you trying to say he meant literal sons and daughters? like as in he was ther bilogical father one generation removed? because if not then clearly he is speaking in metaphor, and clearly he did not say pure blood Lehites. So clearly he was not having a Book of Mormon problem, it's just you...
He said whose sons and daughters you are. This is reinforced by other statements :
“I sense a great spirit of gratitude for this new temple,” remarked President Hinckley. “The Saints have waited a very, very long time.” He continued: “It has been a very interesting thing to see the descendants of Father Lehi in the congregations that have gathered in the temple. So very many of these people have the blood of Lehi in their veins, and it is just an intriguing thing to see their tremendous response and their tremendous interest.” (Remarks at the dedication of the Guayaquil, Ecuador temple, reported in “News of the Church,” Ensign, Oct. 1999, p. 74)
He wasn’t having a bom problem like you are DU.
DU gripes about none sourced quotes – Hint DU, the source is listed using ()’s but just because you can’t figure it out on your own and have to be spoon fed.
Why is that unlikely? You have a Small group with known DNA that intermarries with a larger group with unknown DNA. Now you take the Descendents of Judah, who the Females will be carrying his wife's mtX markers, and you want to compare descendents of Joseph Who's daughers would be carrying his wifes mtX markers and you are saying these markers from diffrent sources should match? LOL!
those mtDNA will be promulgated from mother to daughter regardless of who the father is. They will contain middle eastern haplogroup X related markers. Unless you kill off all the women, these markers will be perpetuated. Read up on it again at this site again, if you still can’t figure it out. The writing level of the site is not set that high DU, it is made so that grade school children would be able to understand.
I can see why you work better with reocks, Higher logic and math seem to be a problem for you.
No, in your case you have been conditioned to believe that serious, critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis.
repeatedly refuted mtDNA articles refuted by the clear explaination given by the Genome project linked above.
Who prove the Book of Mormon talks abou tothers being here. The jaridites were only talked about because of the records they left and the interpeters that came with them that could be passed down with the records to aid in translation. The Nephites talk of others and don't say where they came from you just want to assume they all came from Jerusalem, and a scientist can't do that.
What records did they leave DU – show me the documents. . . . what none to be found to be examined???? Then those records cannot be considered proof now can they. Perhaps you should look at the migration map developed by DNA analysis. It is detailed and NONE of the DNA associated with the middle east shows up there. Again, your prophets have taught the doctrine from the bom that all the Amerindians are descendants of Lehi – a very specific connection with very specific DNA associated. As such, your DNA die out argument fails. The peoples identified in the bom are all identified as coming from Israel and immediate regions (middle east).
Mulek was the last of his line because his family had all been killed, the rest we don't know who or where they came from, just that they were more numerous than the Nephites and Lamanites. (Right here not knowing their genetic makeup you lose the ability to preove a negative with science.
Crandall said specifically middle eastern DNA which means if they came from the middle east, that dna came with them. Mulek was a Jew – defined middle eastern heritiage – or are you trying to claim he was a hobbit now?
Some of them were Jews, It als says they had joined several groups who's genetics are unknown to us.
Is says specifically they came from Jerusalem DU.
Some of the people of zarahemla were definately from Jerusalem, but we are not given the genetics of all,
Who lived in Jerusalem – jews. Who is the story line about – jews who left jerusalem. These so-called others - speculation counter to the Sacred Record article above.
and the People of Zarahemla took in Coriantumer, and then the people of Lehi. The Book of Momron has them become numerous quickly, too quickly for birth to account for it, They married in with other groups that were not remarkable enough to talk about in this scriptureal record.
Even if this was the same coriantumer, one man is not going to overwhelm the genetics of a jewish population numbering in the thousands LOL. Ether is alledged to have told him that the Lord would spare him and his household if they would repent; otherwise, they would be destroyed and another people would inherit the land Enter Lehi – stage right LOL.
Ah, but if you were interested in truth, you'd have to admit that the theory you are espousing that the Nephites landed in a land that was empty. If they could find the jaridites, who else was here? all but one was killed is sononomous with most were killed in my book.
Depends upon what the meaning of “is” is now DU.
So you assume in spite of the evidence to the contrary.
DU you have provided nothing but conjecture. All the peoples in Lehi’s party, Zarahelma and Mulek are specifically noted as coming from Jerusalem and immediate region. The bom is completely silent on any of these others joining up along the way – that is entirely conjecture
Mormon prophets taught the doctrine from the bom that the Amerindians are the direct descendants of Lehi. Modern science show that the Amerindians are descendants of Asias that crossed the Bering Straits tens of thousands of years ago. Mormon prophets teaching from the bom repeately refute DU’s vanishing DNA arguments. If the Amerindians are descendants of Lehi – they will carry the middle eastern marker DNA. DU might like to snip citation sourced the old fashioned way – with ()’s, but that does not make those quotes any less real
Again wiht the assumptions, you assume we wear pants (just funning with you, we do) Again you seem to have a problem with the concept of being a descendent without being a pure blood descedent we have no such limitation.
DU, hopefully you’ve studied the transmission of the male and female DNA markers on the Nat’l Geo website and now see the fallacy of your argument.
snipping a bunch more personal attacks and non sequiters
Godzilla, again to make it simple enough for you, Momron leaders have said and I agree wiht them that th American Indians are descendednts of Lehi. I assert that they are not pure blood and that their DNA signiture may even be unreadable after the dilution if has gone through over the ages.
I’ll just pause to remind Lurkers that DU’s analysis was totally refuted in post 651 , real easy to understand information on how wrong he is can be found here.
Godzilla, this is a perfect time for me to point out that you keep making fun of me and calling me stupid when I say somehting like that Nephi Could have smelted ore to make the tools to make a ship, yet here we are I am now teaching you about anchient smelting techniques and to be quite frank, if you were a student I was teaching you'd be expelled. Get up off of your duff and do some research.
Talking to your self again I see, you can find help for that. You have not taught me a single thing that I didn’t already know about ancient smelting – your citations show all that you do not have a basic grasp of it – from equating viking technique of 800-1100AD to 600BC, calling mining of iron bearing material for pigments equal to mining for iron ore, an equating smelting of the 1700s AD to 600BC. Take a look at the “tools” required for smelting iron – where do you put them at in YOUR backpack (woops, forgot the propane cylinder. You cannot even tell me what iron ore nephi would have used – let alone you know what iron ore is composed of! You cannot even use the correct termonology and yet you claim to be lecturing me? So tell me, how does nephi work the bloom – with his bare hands - oh yes, a knife and shovel? Where does he find the flux, is the timber suitable for making charcoal? Can you tell me an estimated yield for a burn or how long a normal run lasted? You are no teacher, and you wouldn’t even do a good job on television. You cannot even define what tools would be required to make an open ocean vessel capable of crossing the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Your little bleat is pathetic and it pains me to see you stoop to such an attack.
You don't even seem to know when you have been handed your logical teeth, but you sure can post a longwinded boring post with no links, no pictures, and no intelligence behind it.
Wow, you really want to be spoon fed. Don’t bother to go to the links I’ve posted time and again DU – that I have not posted links is a flat out lie. Remember, yours is the legacy Sorenson spoke about -
First, they train the reader that serious, critical thought is unnecessary and maybe even undesirable, that any source of information will serve no matter how unreliable, and that logical absurdity is as good as sound analysis. Second, the reader gets the false impression that all is well in Zion, that the outside world is being forced to the LDS point of view, and that the only role LDS scholars need play in Book of Mormon-related studies is to use scissors and paste effectively. Third, the underlying complexity and subtlety of the Book of Mormon are masked by a pseudo-scholarship to which everything is simple. If anyone needs to get off their duff – its you DU – there’s a whole real world out side of the mormon faith enhancing rumor mills
Let me iterate my points on this thread:
The Book of Momorn does not claim that all or even the majority of the people who came to the americas came from jerusalem, therefore saying the DNA doesn't come from there is irelavent.
The teachings of the prophets from Smith to present day that the doctrine from the bom is that the Amerindicans are descendants of Lehi and Abraham. That leaves no room for others but does show that the prophet and teachers of the mormon church recognzed that the bom claimed the majority fo the Amerindians were desended from Lehi- a jew who was the resident of jerusalem.
The Lemba people were tracable only becasue they had Strict rules agains intermarriage.
While they had rules, there was intermarriage and any intermarriage would only serve to preserve the genes, not eliminate the markers.
The Lamanites and Nephites had no such rules
Doesn’t matter – they were from the same genetic pool of middle easterners from israel, chock full of middle eastern dna markers.
Smelting is something that can be done with crude impliments
Funny, I though DU taught me something here – yet he never mentions just what these “crude tools” are or how Nephi came about these tools to begin with.
Momrons do not say the Indians are pure blood Mormon leaders so not say the Indians are pure blood
They don’t need to be because genetics (mtDNA and Y chromosone) do not mix up like DU erroneously contends (hopefully he got the message in post 651 and knows better now) but are handed down father to son, mother to daughter intact transgenerationally. These genetic markers do not get mixed up (unlike DU)
DNA that is diluted can only be traced back a few hundred years, 2,641 is just too many years and generations to trace a diluted DNA signiture through.
DNA markers have been used to map human population movement tens of thousands of years in the past. You see, DU is repeating his flawed understanding of population genetics used by genetic researchers to document the movement of asian into America and being the founding population for today’s Amerindians. Mormonism’s prophets have taught from the bom the doctrine to the contrary – that Lehi’s group were the founders of the Amerindians – but modern science has proven otherwise. DU is left trying to parrot the professors at byu who are refuting the prophets.
The burden of proof is upon you for you are the one claiming to prove something wrong.
You are the one stuck with trying to defend a mythology with absolutely no evidence to back you up (unless we want to lower our standards and allow ET to phone your home).