[ChicagoHebrew]

I have better things to do than argue with you. I gave you information, all of which can be found quite easily on the web. If you have any interest in looking for it, you know have enough information to google it and find it. If you prefer to keep believing in fairy tales, without ever searching for the truth, that’s your choice also.

[colorcountry]

It’s time to update my tagline, even though I love my present one.

[DelphiUser]

I have better things to do than argue with you.

Then why did you come here and post calling others idiots because of what they believe, did you expect no opposition to your pronouncement of intellectual judgment? (Silly rabbit religion threads are for arguing!)

I gave you information, all of which can be found quite easily on the web.

To me this sounds like:

"I'm sure you can find evidence to support what I said (even though I can't be bothered to) don't you care about supporting my argument more than I do?"

If you have any interest in looking for it, you know have enough information to google it and find it.

Let me make this clear, I have no interest in trying to support your argument which I disagree with, instead, I spend time on things I do believe in. Feel free to try to help me with my research since that seems to be what you think people should do.

If you prefer to keep believing in fairy tales, without ever searching for the truth, that’s your choice also.

Let's see, I post video of several geneticists discussing the issue, and even post my personal logical reasoning on the topic, complete with links and I'm the one believing in fairy tails? Hey whatever gets you through the day FRiend.

For those who don't know what was linked earlier, I'll include the text of my page that was linked here:

Does DNA from Indians prove anything about the Book of Mormon?
Lets look at some claims from DNA "Experts" then we'll talk about why they got what they Got when they did their research: From Take a Stand ministries

The research shows that 96.5% of them show an Asian origin

From When DNA Evidence is Ignored: Systematic Bias Against Non-Asian Origins of Ancient Americans When DNA evidence is ignored

It is wrong to say that there has been no DNA evidence pointing to non-Asian (e.g., European or Middle East) origins of ancient Native Americans. But some of the possible evidence has routinely been discarded and ignored.

There are also lots of people claiming a the Halpotypes from central Siberia prove the Indians came from there, why so many "Sources" for Indian DNA?

The answer is simple, in a genetically promiscuous group (People who will reproduce with people outside their group) you can find anything you are looking for if you look long enough. A genetically conservative group (People that reproduces exclusively with people of their group) the Jews are a really great example of this, they inter marry so rarely with outsiders that they actually have some genetic diseases that are unique to "their group" (Tay-Sachs disease). When speaking of A genetically Promiscuous group, Americans come to mind, we tend to be open minded genetically speaking, we marry anybody, and everybody into our "melting pot", and historically this is what the American Indians did too.

How does this genetic promiscuity affect DNA studies?

DNA geological studies require three things

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

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

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

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

Supposition #2 A genetically conservative group When living apart:

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

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

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

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

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

Result? You cannot prove the Book of Mormon True or False with DNA. why? The American Indians were not a genetically conservative group, they would marry in vi kings and Spanish and Europeans, if they had been genetically conservative, and we could see that their DNA came from say Africa, that would be a blow to the Book of Mormon's credibility, but this is exactly what you would expect from a group that started as a genetically impure sample and diluted itself as it went.

On the other hand, if you could find a group of Indians who had halpotypes that did descend from the Middle east, that would be a significant support for the Book of Mormon.

Keith Crandall, a population geneticist who specializes in these kinds of research was asked to confirm the work done by many who were "outside their specialty", after doing the research, he joined the LDS church, and now teaches Genetics at BYU.

These videos are from fairLDS.org, and is a fair representation of what Mormons think about DNA and the Book of Mormon.
part 1 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
part 2 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
Part 3 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA

To sum up, DNA does not and cannot disprove the Book of Mormon, because the necessary circumstances are not there to support a negative conclusion, however, there is evidence to support the Book of Mormon if you want to look for it.

[Godzilla]

I have better things to do than argue with you. I gave you information, all of which can be found quite easily on the web. If you have any interest in looking for it, you know have enough information to google it and find it. If you prefer to keep believing in fairy tales, without ever searching for the truth, that’s your choice also.

True, very true. It is not just one line of dna/genetic study that disproves the Lamamite-American Indian myth, but multiple studies such as:

Y-chromosome
mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA)
Polymorphic Alu insertions
Retroviral DNA elements
Intestinal microbial flora
Domesticated animals

To try to account for the lack a any physical, scientifically verifiable evidence, there are at least four theories for accounting where these Nephites/Lamanites resided:

Hemispheric Geographists
Limited Geographists
North American Geographists
Alternative Geographists

Yet the prophetic voice of the mormon presidency remains silent - allowing the unauthorized ramblings of the apologists to scramble everywhere to deflect the mormon sheeple from the truth.

[ejonesie22]

My friend, I see you have come across the LDS “tarbaby”. I am glad you escaped before getting stuck. it is probably a wiser course than what many of us do, but also more then likely not as entertaining...