--When You’re in a Fix, Go to God’s Bag of Tricks

One of the most absurd and desperate attempts ever made by LDS apologists to rescue their fictional nonsense (otherwise known as the Book of Mormon) from the jaws of modern science is to insist that so-called “Lamanite DNA” was changed by God in order to bring the Book of Mormon into line with the science of modern-day genetics.

On the other hand, you really can't blame LDS apologists for throwing this Hail-Mary it-came-to-pass.

As one critic of this bizarre LDS article of faith observes:

“The Book of Mormon claims to be the most correct book on earth--a history and the keystone of the faith of the Latter-day Saints--and so it has been proclaimed by all the presidents and prophets of the Church since its inception. But with no Israelite migration, all the ensuing stories become fiction . . . .

“How do LDS respond to this? . . .

“Some have suggested that God changed the DNA [of ‘Lamanites’] to test the faith of Mormons.

“That would make the God who claims to be the embodiment of truth a deceiver.”

(“DNA Research vs. the Book of Mormon: LDS in Trouble Because of DNA Evidence,” at: http://www.mormonsinshock.com/DNABOM.htm)


Well, duh.

But deceive, the Mormon God must--which makes him what is known in Make-Believe 101 as a “trickster deity”:

“In mythology, and in the study of folklore and religion, a trickster is a god . . . who plays tricks or who otherwise disobeys normal rules and conventional behavior. . . . The trickster deity breaks the rules of the gods or nature, sometimes maliciously (for example, Loki), but usually unintentionally with ultimately positive effects.”

(“Cram 101: Textbook Outlines,” [Content Technologies, Inc., 2012], at:
http://books.google.com/books?id=o_zLcOSj25EC&pg=PT370&lpg=PT370&dq=%22The+trickster+deity+breaks+the+rules+of+the+gods+or+nature,+sometimes+maliciously+(for+example,+Loki)+but+usually,+albeit+unintentionally,+with+ultimately+positive+effects.%22&source=bl&ots=7tvvxwH9ln&sig=bYJThV3r2HJ051TVrMTPY3We2ws&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TGOcUeyVL5fi4APSs4HIAw&ved=0CEgQ6AEwBA)


With the Mormon God, it's maliciously.

The LDS Trickster Deity's gene-pool ploy goes something like this:

God changed the DNA of the “Lamanites” from Semitic--(the alleged genetic heritage of ancient Book of Mormon sailors who the Mormon Church claims migrated to the Americas from the Middle East)--to Asian--(the genetic heritage of Native Americans whom the Mormon Church claims are direct descendants of those same Book of Mormon migrants).

Before you bust a gut laughing your genes off, the idea of Mormonism’s God employing such a gimmick when it comes to “Lamanite DNA” is not a new one in the annals of LDS Church history.

After all, thanks to the divine guidance of Joseph Smith, the mad-scientist Mormon God has long been in the business of changing the blood of Mormon converts into Jewish blood—and those Mormon converts have included Indians.

John L. Brooke, professor of history at Ohio State University, explains this loony LDS lab work in his book, “The Refiner’s Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844”:

“In the spring of 1836, the Prophet [Joseph Smith] consecrated the first Mormon temple at Kirtland. . . . Temples became the site of priesthood rituals and of believers' direct relations with the divine. . . .

"Joseph made his own father the Patriarch of the Church and the elder Joseph Smith bestowed ‘patriarchal blessings’ that changed the blood of Mormon converts into the blood of Israelites, a transformation that soon extended to all temple baptisms.

“This blood alchemy would again come into play when the Prophet foretold that Mormon men would take Indian women as wives and that the children of those unions would be ‘white, delightsome, and just’). . . .

“Through all these means, Joseph Smith made an institutional Church out of magical beginnings. It was the most astonishing of his alchemical achievements.”

(“The Refiner's Fire:The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844,” by John L. Brooke [Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1994] at: http://lds-mormon.com/brooke.shtml)


But Mormons fervently believe in magic. It says so on their underwear.
_____


--Genetically Mutating Indians from Jews into Asians: A Nutty Idea that Rings True with Latter-day Saints

Not only is the notion of a Mormon alchemist God changing “Lamanite DNA” into Asian DNA not a new one, it seems to be one that rank-and-file Latter-day Saints are quite willing to accept (along with all their own planets and multiple wives).

As one believing Mormon writes, changing "Lamanite DNA" is little more than skin deep:

“When God changed the Lamanites to separate them from their brethren, they were actually and literally changed. They didn't appear as their brothers, the Nephites. God changed their color and appearance.

“If that is the case (which I believe it is), then it is only reason to believe that their DNA was changed. It sounds pretty simple to me. If they look different then they had to be changed. And they were.

“And the Book of Mormon also talks about many leaving in ships to settle other places. You read the part about Hagoth? So that would explain the relation to certain others in Asia as well.

“And what about the other lost tribes of Israel? They could very well be many of the different Asian cultures, but we don't know, so I can only speculate.”

(“Mormons: Lamanite DNA issue?,” under “Resolved Issues,” posted by “plastik punk,” in reader forum, "six years ago," at: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071116094802AAU6MHA)


You call that reason?

Geneticist Simon Southerton observes that, based on his personal travels through LDS Land, Mormon-churched cheerleaders for the Book of Mormon are more than willing to accept that God changed “Lamanite DNA” to Asian DNA:

“During my trip behind the Zion Curtain, I became more familiar with the dominant lines of defense in response to the DNA evidence challenging the Book of Mormon. Some of you may be interested in my responses so I have posted these below. . . .

"It is important to remember that most DNA apologists defending the Book of Mormon do so on the assumption that Lehi and his family made a small genetic impact in the Americas. They flatly reject the hemispheric geography--the view accepted by most Mormons and all the prophets. This needs to be kept in mind when considering their arguments.

“[One of their arguments is]: ‘When God changed the skin color of American Indians, couldn’t he have changed the DNA, as well?’"

Southerton’s response:

“Yes, if God is a conniving bastard who would stop at nothing to trick his children, he could have changed the DNA. But why did he have to change it so that it matched Asian DNA? How could a Heavenly Father, who supposedly loves us more than we can comprehend, stoop to such depths?! We’ve already offended the Blacks and the Indians. Do we need to offend the Asians, too!”

(“Answering The DNA Apologetics,” by Simon Southerton, on “Recovery from Mormonism” discussion board, 16 February 2005)


Southerton subsequently tones down a bit in his article, “Answers to Apologetic Claims about DNA and the Book of Mormon,” but still rightly mocks the moronic Mormon notion of God changing out “Lamanite DNA” for a more suitable Asian variety.

There, he calls it one of several "frequently advanced arguments from the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) and the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) related to DNA and the Book of Mormon--most notably (or at least most succinctly) in the latter’s brochure, ‘Is an Historical Book of Mormon Compatible with DNA Science?’"

Southerton observes that "[s]ince [such a claim has] gained some currency within LDS circles and I am frequently asked about [it] . . . , I have concluded that it would be best to summarize my response in [a] succinct manner:

“’When God cursed American Indians and changed their skin color, as reported in the Book of Mormon, God could have changed their DNA as well.
'"


Southerton's answer this time:

"If so, why would God change the DNA so it matched Asian DNA? As Latter-day Saints, we have already offended Blacks and the Indians. Are we going to offend Asians now, as well?
”

(“Answers to Apologetic Claims about DNA and the Book of Mormon,” by:Simon G. Southerton,, “Under Mormons in Transition,” at’ http://mit.irr.org/answers-apologetic-claims-about-dna-and-book-of-mormon)

I liked his first version better. :)
_____


--For the Record: Before the Mormon Church Goes Changing Native Americans into Asians for PR Purposes, Keep in Mind that It was Joseph Smith Who Made Them Jewish in the First Place

Stick with me here.

One need only to go to the words of Mormon-Church inventor and bamboozler, Joseph Smith, on this matter. It was he who unambiguously declared that Native Americans are direct-line genetic descendants of Middle Eastern Semites who lived in Jerusalem.

Really.

In his journal of 9 November 1835, Smith wrote:

“He [the Angel Moroni] 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. He explained many things of the prophesies to me.”

(Joseph Smith Journal, 9 November 1835; cited in Dean C. Jesse, Mark Ashurst-McGee, Richard L. Jensen, eds., “The Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, Volume 1, 1832-1839” [Salt Lake City, Utah: Church Historian’s Press, 2008], pp. 88-89; see also, Scott H. Faulring, ed., “An American Prophet's Record: The Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith,” Vol. 1 [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books and Smith Research Associates, 1987], p. 51; and Dan Vogel, ed., “Early Mormon Documents” [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1996], p. 44)


Just to get this straight, what exactly did Smith mean when he said the Angel Moroni told him in his farmhouse bedroom one night that “the Indians were the literal descendants of Abraham”?

One RfM poster clearly explains:

“To clarify what ‘literal descendants of Abraham’ meant to Joseph Smith, look at a revelation written on March 28, 1835, before his [Moroni] journal story:

“D&C 107:40 ‘The order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made.’

“To Joseph Smith, ‘literal descendant’ meant from father to son. These are from sources of direct evidence. . . . The journal and D&C are direct evidence because they are the words of Joseph Smith.

“What these words tell us is that Moroni said the Indians were literally from Abraham, father-to-son, through Isaac and Jacob on down to the tribes in New York in 1835.”

(“Apologists Ignore Evidence,” posted by “Hoggle,” on “Recovery from Mormonism” bulletin board, 25 April 2011, at: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,178181,178181#msg-178181)


Also invoking Joseph Smith as the expert on all this, eventual Mormon Church president Spencer W. Kimball stated that today’s Native Americans are bloodline-Jewish, thanks to Lehi of Jerusalem:

"With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem some 600 years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. 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, for in the middle of their history there were those who left America in ships of their making and went to the islands of the sea.

"Not until the revelations of Joseph Smith, bringing forth the Book of Mormon, did any one know of these migrants. It was not known before, but now the question is fully answered.

“Now the Lamanites number about 60 million; they are in all of the states of America, from Tierra del Fuego all the way up to Point Barrows, and they are in nearly all the islands of the sea from Hawaii south to southern New Zealand.

"The [Mormon] Church is deeply interested in all Lamanites because of these revelations and because of this great Book of Mormon, their history that was written on plates of gold and deposited in the hill. The translation by the Prophet Joseph Smith revealed a running history for 1,600 years before Christ until 400 after Christ--a history of these great people who occupied this land for that 1,000 years. Then, for the next 1,400 years, they lost much of their high culture. The descendants of this mighty people were called Indians by Columbus in 1492 when he found them here."

(Spencer W. Kimball, "Of Royal Blood," in “Ensign,” July 1971, p. 7)


Finally (at least until recently, when the Mormon Church quietly changed the wording), the introduction to the “Book of Mormon” itself said this about American Indian genetic heritage:

"After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians."

(Book of Mormon, 1991 edition)


As mentioned, however, that introduction to the Book of Mormon has since been altered, as reported by the “Salt Lake Tribune” on 8 November 2007:

“The LDS Church has changed a single word in its introduction to the Book of Mormon, a change observers say has serious implications for commonly held LDS beliefs about the ancestry of American Indians.

“Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe founder Joseph Smith unearthed a set of gold plates from a hill in upper-state New York in 1827 and translated the ancient text into English. The account, known as the Book of Mormon, tells the story of two Israelite civilizations living in the New World. One derived from a single family who fled from Jerusalem in 600 B.C. and eventually splintered into two groups, known as the Nephites and Lamanites.

“The book's current introduction, added by the late LDS apostle, Bruce R. McConkie in 1981, includes this statement: 'After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.'

“The new version, seen first in Doubleday's revised edition, reads, 'After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.'

“LDS leaders instructed Doubleday to make the change, said senior editor Andrew Corbin, so it ‘would be in accordance with future editions the Church is printing.’

“The change ‘takes into account details of Book of Mormon demography which are not known,’ LDS spokesman Mark Tuttle said . . . .

"It also steps into the middle of a raging debate about the book's historical claims.

“Many Mormons, including several Church presidents, have taught that the Americas were largely inhabited by Book of Mormon peoples. In 1971, Church President Spencer W. Kimball said that Lehi, the family patriarch, was 'the ancestor of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea.'

“After testing the DNA of more than 12,000 Indians, though, most researchers have concluded that the continent's early inhabitants came from Asia across the Bering Strait.

“With this change, the LDS Church is ‘conceding that mainstream scientific theories about the colonization of the Americas have significant elements of truth in them,’ said Simon Southerton, a former Mormon and author of 'Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA and the Mormon Church.'

"’DNA has revealed very clearly how closely related American Indians are to their Siberian ancestors,‘ Southerton said in an e-mail from his home in Canberra, Australia. ‘The Lamanites are invisible, not principal ancestors.’

“LDS scholars, however, dispute the notion that DNA evidence eliminates the possibility of Lamanites. They call it 'oversimplification' of the research.

“On the Church's official Web site, lds.org, it says, ‘Nothing in the Book of Mormon precludes migration into the Americas by peoples of Asiatic origin. The scientific issues relating to DNA, however, are numerous and complex.’

“Mormon researcher John M. Butler and DNA expert further argues that ‘careful examination and demographic analysis of the Book of Mormon record in terms of population growth and the number of people described implies that other groups were likely present in the Promised Land when Lehi's family arrived, and these groups may have genetically mixed with the Nephites, Lamanites, and other groups. Events related in the Book of Mormon likely took place in a limited region, leaving plenty of room for other Native American peoples to have existed.’

“In recent years, many LDS scholars have come to share Butler's belief in what is known as the ‘limited geography’ theory. By this view, the Nephites and Lamanites restricted their activities to portions of Central America, which would explain their absence from the general American Indian genetics.

“Kevin Barney, a Mormon lawyer and independent researcher in Chicago, welcomes the introduction's word change.

"’I have always felt free to disavow the language of the [Book of Mormon's] introduction, footnotes and dictionary, which are not part of the canonical scripture,’ said Barney, on the board of FAIR, a Mormon apologist group. 'These things can change as the scholarship progresses and our understanding enlarges. This suggests to me that someone on the Church's scripture committee is paying attention to the discussion.’”

(“Single Word Change in Book of Mormon Speaks Volumes,” by Peggy Fletcher Stack, “Salt Lake Tribune,” 8 November 2007, at: http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_7403990)


Perhaps the Mormon Church’s scripture committee should be paying more attention to the words of Joseph Smith:

“[H]e [the Angel Moroni] said the Indians were the literal descendants of Abraham."

As if the Mormon Church doesn’t have enough proplems with its own theology, how about all the science, for gawd’s sake?
_____


--Earth to Kolobites: Changing Your Skin Color Does Not Change Your DNA

Brigham City, Utah, writer Scott Johnson describes the Mormon Church’s problematic run-ins with the science of human genetics, while also reporting its ridiculous responses to that reality:

“ . . . [T]he LDS Church has scrambled to provide answers to their followers, and by extention, counter-arguments to their detractors. . . .

“The arguments that they put forth are either patently absurd non-sequiturs or they invoke a slough of arcane and irrelevant data that might sound scientific but really have nothing to do with the issue at hand. They become nothing more than a smokescreen, designed to confuse.

"The one thing these counter-arguments have in common is that they [show] a belief system in crisis that is grasping at straws to come to grips with the devastating evidence against their foundational scriptures.

“[One of the main] LDS counter-arguments to the DNA challenge [is] as follows:

“ . . . ‘God changed the DNA of Native Americans.’

"This argument is often heard from the official LDS sources, and many Mormons themselves recognize this as a completely inadequate response.

“The obvious reaction is, ‘Why would God stoop to such trickery?’

“The argument sometimes tries to justify itself by saying that when, according to the Book of Mormon, God cursed the Lamanites with dark skin, that He had to change the DNA structure.

“Without getting into the racist implications of this statement, there are numerous examples of people groups, most notably the Lemba in southern Africa, who HAVE been positively identified (using DNA testing) as having Hebrew ancestry, even though their skin color and physical features are like those of other Africans in their area. Similar examples have been found in Southeast Asia.

“A change in skin color or other physical attributes does not hide genetic ancestry.”

(“The DNA Dispute: Refuting the ‘Top 10’ Challenges to the DNA Evidence,“ by Scott Johnson, originally published in “The Fieldworker,” Fall 2004, original emphasis, at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mscbc.org%2Fdispute.htm&ei=AyqcUaq8EpW54AP1hYFo&usg=AFQjCNHXnKy1hQrks9LRH1Lc52WT4GygpQ&sig2=6xiG61vvJrZJRSa2aVz-Jg&bvm=bv.46751780,d.dmg)


And the problems just keep on mounting.
_____


--Female Mitochondrial DNA (Used to Genetically Trace Lineage) Does Not Change Enough to Genetically Transform Asian-Linked “Lamanites” into Jewish-Linked Ones

As another RfM poster notes, this one's a real credibility killer:

“ . . . [T]he ‘Lamanite DNA’ problem is one of the more important bits of evidence that contradicts Mormonism.

“In a nutshell, the problem [for the Mormon Church] is this: . . .

“The state of the science of genetics has advanced to the point that it is possible to isolate DNA from mitochondria and from the Y chromosome and to identify markers or reference points in the DNA.

“ . . . Mitochondrial DNA (‘mtDNA’) is passed down from a mother to her children in the mitochondrion, which is the little power plant in each cell. The mtDNA passes to the next generation in the mitochondrion of the ovum. It is then passed on down the line only by the females. The mtDNA passes down the subsequent generations in an exclusively matrilineal path.

“The Y chromosome is the male sex chromosome, and is passed down from father to son, or exclusively patrilineally.

“NOW HERE'S THE IMPORTANT PART: The mtDNA does not do undergo meiosis (no mixing at the bar with other DNA in sexual reproduction that the nuclear DNA does), and passes from one generation to the next intact, except for genetic mutations. In other words, if one were to trace back on the mother's side, going from mother to mother, the mtDNA in you would look identical or nearly so to the mtDNA of your great-great-great-great-great grandmother.

"For males, the y-chromosome DNA is passed down mostly without changes, but there are more frequent changes in the y-ch DNA than the mtDNA because a little bit of it sometimes gets mixed with the X chromosome (it is nuclear DNA).

“ . . . Over 99% of the mitochondrial DNA in indigenous Americans is central Asian/Siberian in origin, or at least it matches up well with mtDNA of poeples who by all appearances have been living in central Asia for thousands of years. It's pretty much the same for the y-chromosome DNA, but there is some contamination from those adventurous conquistadores and other Europeans since Columbus.

“ . . . The mtDNA and y-ch DNA of semitic peoples is markedly different from the mtDNA and y-ch DNA of central Asians, and does not look like the DNA of indigenous Americans (Indians, etc.)

“ . . . So, AT THE VERY LEAST, any migration of a party Israelites circa 600 BC (yeah, right!) to the Americas would have had to have very, very minimal impact on the gene pool--there is zero, nada, zilch, zip Semitic mtDNA in the indigenous Americans whose DNA has been tested, and only traces of y-chromosome DNA that might be Israelite/Jewish, and studies show it was very, very likely introduced by Eurpoeans post-Columbus. IN OTHER WORDS, NO EVIDENCE (zero, nada, zilch, zip) of the alleged Lehite migration has been discovered in the DNA of indigenous Americans. NONE.”

(“Basically Yes, [DNA Evidence about the Origin of Native Americans Does) Refute the Book of Mormon ],” posted by “mravel,” 24 January [year not cited], “Recovery from Mormonism” discussion board, original emphasis, at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.exmormon.org%2Fmormon%2Fmormon067.htm&ei=wi2cUb2hO5ev4APoxYGgBg&usg=AFQjCNFh6JJGnS9glO6eJwkdpofVVQ_z8A&sig2=wWXROKLmFfnOdIaTfgOBZw)


But, wait, there are still more flies in the ointment.
_____


--No Compelling Evidence Exists Showing “Lamanite DNA” Has Ever Changed from Semitic to Asian--It’s, You Know, Always Been Asian

Here's a non-Mormon Sunday School review of the science:

“Despite claims by LDS prophets to the contrary, science does not support the view that Native Americans are of Jewish stock. For example, there is no blood antigen evidence for Native Americans being related to the Jews. Natives of North and South America (and Pacific Islanders) have genetic alleles that can be traced exclusively to Asia. Mitochondrial DNA is transmitted unilineally, and is therefore NOT WATERED DOWN [emphasis added] by intermarriage--even the mitochondria of a single remote ancestor of a group would likely show up at least occasionally in tests.

“As noted by geneticist Simon Southerton:

"’I began searching for research papers having some connection with American Indians or Polynesians. Because I was familiar with plant genetics I became interested in recent research on the DNA of American Indians. The principles of DNA analysis are applicable to all living things so it was relatively easy to jump from the plant to the animal kingdom.

“’I rapidly accumulated many scientific papers comparing the mitochondrial DNA of American Indians from numerous tribes with the mitochondrial DNA of other populations around the world.

“’Mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to child each generation. It is essentially a female genealogical lineage, or a maiden name if you like, stored in the mitochondrial DNA sequence. This part of the total DNA genome is used for population studies in many animal species. It is very simple to study because THE MITOCHONDRIAL GENES DON’T GET REARRANGED EACH GENERATION LIKE MOST GENES, which are inherited as a mixed bag from previous generations. I was equally interested in more recent Y-chromosome DNA studies.

“’Male lineages, much like DNA surnames, are passed from father to son and clearly reveal male genealogical lineages.

"’In the last decade scientists from several research groups had tested the mitochondrial DNA of over 2000 American Indians from about a hundred tribes scattered over the length of the Americas. It soon became apparent to me that about 99% of their female lineages were brought into the Americas in excess of 12,000 years ago. Almost all of these lineages are most closely related to those of people in Asia, particularly in southern Siberia near Mongolia. Several tribes in Mesoamerica (which included Aztecs and Mayans) had been tested and all but a couple of individuals out of about 500 had mitochondrial DNA of Asian origin.

“’The small fraction of Native American lineages that were not from Asia appeared to originate in Europe, most likely Spain. DNA studies also showed that the female ancestors of the Polynesians came from South East Asia and not the Americas. Y-chromosome studies, which trace male migrations, strongly support the mitochondrial work, except that the European influence is higher (about 10% in the Americas).

"’For two weeks I wrestled with the research. I collected more and more research papers but failed to find anything that supported migration of Jewish people before Columbus. Enough is known about the DNA lineages of Jews to be very confident that they are clearly distinguishable from Asian lineages. They would also be easily identifiable if they were present in the Americas in significant numbers. I struggled with the complete discrepancy between the research and my understanding of the Book of Mormon and the doctrine of the Lamanites. The Book of Mormon describes the occurrence of Hebrew civilizations in the Americas numbering in the millions. It is clear that the victorious Lamanites would have numbered in the millions in about 400 AD. I could not understand how such large numbers of people could have escaped detection . . . .

"’Soon after I came to the realization that the Book of Mormon is not what it claims to be, I became deeply upset. I had firmly believed that it was true. I had not been looking for evidence to prove it wrong. I had been looking for research that could be viewed as supportive. It was a shock to have my belief shattered so quickly . . . .

"’I corresponded with this BYU professor on about four occasions until I became even more convinced of the seriousness of the situation. He was a very nice man and he was very honest with me. In the midst of his lengthy defenses of the Church he acknowledged that greater than 98% of American Indians came from Asia and that this conflicts with current thinking in the church regarding the whereabouts of the Lamanites today.

"Not only did he confirm my conclusions, he strengthened them even further. He confirmed that scientists at BYU had tested 3000 American Indians from Peru and they came up with the same problem of virtually all the female DNA lineages coming from Asia. Now I knew that all three major civilizations in the Americas the Aztecs, Maya and Incas were comprised of people who trace their genealogy back to Siberia. Data from Peru had been conspicuously lacking in my research."

(Simon Southerton, “DNA Fenealogies of American Indians and the Book of Mormon,” 17 March 2000, emphasis added, at: http://www.exmormon.org/whylft125.htm)


“Consider also this . . . conclusion (May, 2002) by [Mormon anthropologist] Thomas Murphy that genetic research fails to show any connection between Native Americans and Israelite DNA:

"’Some Latter-day Saints have expressed optimism that DNA research would lead to a vindication of the Book of Mormon as a translation of a genuine ancient document. The hope is that DNA research would link Native Americans to ancient Israelites, buttressing LDS beliefs in a way that has not been forthcoming from archaeological, linguistic, historical or morphological research.

“’The results, though, have been disappointing. So far, DNA research lends no support to traditional Mormon beliefs about the origins of Native Americans. Genetic data repeatedly point to migrations from Asia between 7,000 and 50,000 years ago as the primary source of Native American origins. DNA research has substantiated the archaeological, cultural, linguistic and biological evidence that also points overwhelmingly to an Asian origin for Native Americans.

“’While DNA evidence shows that ultimately all human populations are rather closely related, to date no intimate genetic link has been found between ancient Israelites and the indigenous peoples of the Americas-much less within the time frame suggested by the Book of Mormon.

"'After considering recent research in molecular anthropology, summarized here, I have concluded that Latter-day Saints should not expect to find validation for the Book of Mormon in genetics.

"'My assessment echoes that of geneticist and former LDS bishop Simon Southerton, whose survey of the literature on Native American DNA also "failed to find anything that supported migration of Jewish people before Columbus." He concluded "the truth is that there is no reliable scientific evidence supporting migrations from the Middle East to the New World.’”

(“Genetic Evidence Discounts that Native Americans Descended from Jews, #15, ” by Jim Day, under “20 Truths About Mormonism,” at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CDcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2F20truths.info%2F&ei=epKcUZftNqfy0gGD8IG4Cg&usg=AFQjCNH4C_SxozlCB74ti6H5gVU2vIKlzw&sig2=5Kst3WAleCNB9gUehGeZgg)


Brothers and sisters, the time is now yours. (You won't need much because you don't have much to fill it with).
_____


--Dealing with the Weak Mormon Comebacks

In a vain effort to counter Murhpy’s arguments against Mormonism's nagging “Lamanite DNA” problem that just won’t go away, BYU biology professor, Michael F. Whiting, swung for the fence but struck out, declaring:

“[G]iven the complexities of genetic drift, founder effect and introgression, the observation that Native Americans have a preponderance of Asian genes does not conclusively demonstrate that they are therefore not descendants of the Lamanite lineage, because we do not know what genetic signature that Lamanite lineage possessed at the conclusion of the Book of Mormon record."

(“DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective,” by Michael F. Whiting, in “Journal of Book of Mormon Studies,” Volume 12, pp. 24–35, 115–16, Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, 2003, at: http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=12&num=1&id=311)


(Note on definitions: (1) The term “genetic drift” refers to “the process of change in the genetic composition of a population due to chance or random events rather than by natural selection, resulting in changes in allele frequencies over time.” (2) An “allele” is “an alternative form of a gene (one member of a pair) that is located at a specific position on a specific chromosome. These DNA codings determine distinct traits that can be passed on from parents to offspring.” (3) The “founder effect” is “the establishment of a new population by a few original founders (in an extreme case, by a single fertilized female) which carry only a small fraction of the total genetic variation of the parental population. The result is that a given allele, gene, chromosome, or part of a chromosome found in members of the population can be traced back to one ancestral individual”).

In response, Murphy clobbered Whiting in his article, “Simply Implausible--DNA and a Mesoamerican Setting for the Book of Mormon":

“The idea that 'founder effect' and 'genetic drift' may account for genetic evidence is contradicted by statements and prophecies in the Book of Mormon itself and would require hundreds of unlikely chance events in three different founding populations.”

(“Simply Implausible: DNA and a Mesoamerican Setting for the Book of Mormon,” by Thomas F. Murphy, “Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought,” Vol. 35, No. 4, 2003, p. 131, at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CEcQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpapers.ssrn.com%2Fsol3%2Fpapers.cfm%3Fabstract_id%3D2177709&ei=hJGcUZuNHvOx4AOzm4GoDw&usg=AFQjCNFiyRuj8Hbckh8XOdIM1RiEaGSSsQ&sig2=seT7F9kXjQO0LpU6ky252Q)


Piling on with more inconvenient scientific facts, Southerton came to the defense of Murphy:

“[According to Mormon apologists], 'genetic drift' . . . would prevent us from detecting Israelite genes [in Lamanites]. I agree entirely. In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites entered such a massive native population it would be very, very hard to detect their genes 200, 2000 or even 20,000 years later.

"But does such a scenario fit with what the Book of Mormon plainly states or what the prophets have taught for 175 years? Short answer: No! Long answer: Nooo! “

(Simon Southerton, “Answering The DNA Apologetics
on “Recovery from Mormonism” discussion board, 16 February 2005)


Meanwhile, Murphy pointed out Whiting’s gaping-hole lack of scientific evidence for the Book of Mormon’s storyline of supposed Native American semitic origins:

"While Whiting . . . [has] exclaimed delight at the prospect of evolutionary biology coming to the defense of the Book of Mormon, he [has] offered no scientific data to substantiate an Israelite origin of indigenous peoples anywhere in the Americas. In fact, he conceded, 'current genetic evidence suggests that Native Americans have a genetic history representative of Asia and not the Middle East.'”

Then, in a stinging rebuke, Murphy chastised Whiting for a lack of scientific professionalism in questioning the peer-reviewed nature of Murphy’s findings:

"One of the most surprising critiques to emerge [is Whiting’s] false allegation that I am evading peer review or that the research I reviewed would not stand up to peer review. [My] article [‘Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics’] was a summary of genetic research on Native American origins, nearly all of which had been subjected to peer review prior to publication in leading scientific journals such as ‘American Journal of Human Genetics,’ ‘Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences’, and ‘American Journal of Physical Anthropology.’”

Murphy’s conclusion:

"Whiting's . . . claims are little more than an inaccurate projection of the inadequacies of LDS apologetics onto my publications.’”

("Genetic Research a 'Galileo Event' for Mormons", by Thomas W. Murphy, “Anthropology News,” 44 (2), p. 20, at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2203607l; fsee also, Murphy’s "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics,” in “American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon,” at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmormonscripturestudies.com%2Fbomor%2Ftwm%2Flamgen.asp&ei=gTecUb xBse14APOm4G4Dg&usg=AFQjCNERMe_equUwv5oHDunbNM9ll7RT2&sig2=MYmOS-gePwNAxhWAdN3RfQ&bvm=bv.46751780,d.dmg; and “Genetic Evidence Discounts that Native Americans Descended from Jews,” under “20 Truths about Mormonsim,” at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=18&cad=rja&ved=0CGoQFjAHOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2F20truths.info%2Fmormon%2Fdna.html&ei=ATicUfGIBK7H4AOg6YGICg&usg=AFQjCNEUBaAmrs_LE9GcazeGZK_na_NeXw&sig2=dxCUxZ0-UaJ3Lb6wVYupeg)


But what about small changes that have, in fact, taken place over time in mtDNA?

In actuality, these modifications have served to underscore the scientifically-verified Asian, not Semiitic, origins of Native American peoples:

“In the last few years numerous research groups around the world have been revisiting the question of the origins of the American Indians. There are mountains of evidence that point to them coming from Asia over 10,000 years ago (linguistic, cultural, morphological, dental etc), but scientists are now using DNA analysis to examine those same old questions

“Scientists are studying the mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomes of different human populations. These portions of our DNA are ideal to study if you want to trace where human populations have lived. We all (boys and girls) inherit our mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) only from our mother. Us boys only inherit our Y chromosomes from our fathers. Mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomes don't get mixed up every generation like most of the rest of our DNA (nuclear DNA) which we inherit (50:50) from both our parents. Because it doesn't get mixed up, they are simple to study. In the Y chromosome or mtDNA DNA sequence can be found a record of all the past changes or mutations occurring in that particular sequence. Human populations that have mostly the same changes in their DNA will be closely related. Groups of Y chromosome or mtDNA sequences that are most similar are grouped together and called lineages or haplogroups. Most of the work has been done on mtDNA but the Y chromosome work is catching up.

“Scientists in at least 20 research groups around the world have now tested the mtDNA of several thousand American Indians from almost 100 tribes all over the Americas. They have found that there are 5 different mtDNA haplogroups in Native Americans. Of the Indians they have tested about 99.6% have mtDNA that clearly came into the Americas across the Bering Strait over 12,000 years ago. When they compared them to the mtDNA of other human populations they were most similar to groups of people located in eastern Asia particularly people from Mongolia. The 0.4% of American Indians that have another mtDNA lineage are likely to result from interbreeding after the arrival of Columbus. They have found European and African lineages in these people and they more common in tribes that have had more post-Columbus contact.

“About 500 American Indians have been tested in Central America, including the Maya, and about 99.8% come from Asia. In South America, where they have had less contact since Columbus they have found 100% of those tested (about 500) to be derived from Asia."

(“Summary of DNA Research to Date,” 5 April, 1999, quoted under “Where is the Lamanite DNA?,” at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=16&cad=rja&ved=0CFUQFjAFOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcorvus.freeshell.org%2Fpsittacus%2Fthree%2Ftract%2Fdna_additional.htm&ei=IjGcUbiXCdPe4AODt4DoCw&usg=AFQjCNHN7iMFfwydG6KfKYF1-el4EixwHw&sig2=fcxeNKobaSBrGWYAdu7G4g)


The comical case for the existence of changed “Lamanite DNA” has now become so difficult for Mormon apologists to defend that some of them have given up trying.
_____


--Pre-Eminent Pro-Mo Apologist Michael R. Ash Admits that “Lamanite”DNA” Hasn’t Been Changed by God

Ash's confession appeared, in all places, the Mormon Church-owned “Deseret News,” where he wrote:

“ . . . [T]he critics have the superior scientific argument — compared to those believers who claim the DNA evidence proves the Book of Mormon . . . .

“Historical dynamics measured by population-genetics methods often rely on the examination of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), which is transferred practically unchanged from mother to child. Thus far, the vast majority of all mtDNA data studied to date on Native American populations indicate Asian affinity.

“This supports the primary scientific theory that the Americas were populated by people migrating from Asia by way of the Bering Strait. . . .

“I not only accept the current DNA studies as accurate, I also don't believe God simply changed Nephite and Lamanite DNA to Asiatic DNA in order to fool scientists. While God certainly has power over all things, I can't accept that he intentionally deceives us.”

(“Challenging Issues, Keeping the Faith: Using DNA to Prove or Disprove the Book of Mormon's Validity,” by Michael R. Ash, “Deseret News,” 5 April 2010, at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=17&cad=rja&ved=0CF0QFjAGOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.deseretnews.com%2Farticle%2F705377603%2FUsing-DNA-to-prove-or-disprove-the-Book-of-Mormons-validity.html%3Fpg%3Dall&ei=IjGcUbiXCdPe4AODt4DoCw&usg=AFQjCNHHOxyS0tZXyy2geEWbs4giTgKS3g&sig2=WnRa9m6QbaM4M2-zt-Sc8Q)


Brother Ash, if the Mormon God doesn’t intentionally deceive people, can’t you at least admit that the Mormon Church does?
_____


--The Best Desperation Fallback of All: The Mormon God Didn’t Change “Lamanite DNA"--He Just Borrowed Some from Somewhere Else

One more RfM poster insists that Mormon apologists have got it all wrong when it comes to explaining how God has managed to fix the genetic goof-ups in the Book of Mormon:

“I heard it differently. God BORROWED Asian DNA.

“When God cursed the Lamanites with brown skin He borrowed the DNA from Asians. He did this because because it was DNA that had already been ‘field tested’ in Asia. In other words, it was DNA that God knew already worked and produced the desired result. This explains why you can't find any Semitic DNA among Native Americans and why you can find Asian DNA.

“This same guy told me he thinks the earth was "organized" which accounts for the fossil record. Pieces of earth were taken from much older planets and that would account for finding fossils that suggest the earth is much older than it really is.

“This person is college educated.”

(“I Heard It Differently. God BORROWED Asian DNA,” posted by “just a thought," on “Recovery from Mormonism” discussion board, 12 June 2011, at: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,215019,215079#msg-215079)

At BYU, no doubt.

**********


So, the Mormon God first field-tested replacement “Lamanite” DNA" in Asia then, once he decided it checked out, implanted it into Jewish-American Indians.

Hell, why not? Mormons have shown they'll believe anything.

Except science.



Edited 20 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2013 06:27PM by steve benson.

One person I talked to mentioned that Southerton was excommunicated, which is why he didn't have to believe what Southerton wrote. How's that for logic!

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2013 03:03PM by steve benson.

Over the last century science has been finding out one decade after the next the Americas have been visited and occupied by old world peoples from various places. I don't understand this train of thought it has to be proved Israelites never came here before Columbus. What if they did? What if it was shown they did come here and breed with American Indians 2000 or more years ago, how would that prove the BOM true? It wouldn't!
The only thing that would give credit to the BOM being true is if the names of people and places in were discovered to exist in ancient writings and that hasn't happened.

Those claims of "hyper-diffusion" aren't born out by the evidence (particularly the shinola from the likes of Gavin Menzies) or held in much regard by mainstream archaeologists. historians, or anthropologists.

Except for the Vikings in L'anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland and possibly the Polynesians on the west coasts of North or South America, Native American cultures all arose independently on this continent, and it amounts to a lot of racist rhetoric to insist otherwise.

That hasn't stopped the likes of Barry Fell, Scott Wolford, Menzies (already noted) and others from making spurious claims and engaging in outright fabrications. That also includes John L. Sorenson, who originated the "Limited Geography Theory." Sorenson has collaborated with Carl L. Johannesen to produce a volume of mythological evidence for such contacts,

http://www.amazon.com/World-Trade-Biological-Exchanges-Before/dp/0595524419

Check out the number of reviews for this one, and you'll get an idea of how credible it is. Contrast that with Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel," which offers one an authentic education in how humans populated the world after emerging from Africa ~50-70,000 years ago...

http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552

Four reviews of the Sorenson/Johannesen volume; One thousand four hundred and twenty-one for Diamond's....

Some years ago I received a heads-up from Simon Southerton on Sorenson's claims, and I engaged a lot of fact checking (and I would welcome review of my work) on the subject. Eric K. graciously archived this as Part I using the board's old software; I have a least this much available for a Part II, and the theme has been consistent. It reduces to a pile of lies, fabrications, and cherry-picking that is inconsistent with authentic scholarship.

http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon606.htm

And here's a group of scholars who recognized the utter "crime against history" that Gavin Menzies was perpetuating with his "evidence" for pre-Columbian "Chinese maritime discoveries."

http://www.1421exposed.com/

I provided links to the original Atlantic article series "The Diffusionists Have Landed," and it's clear the reporters on the one bought the "diffusionist's" dog and pony show being offered them.

A simple recognition that the maritime compass wasn't invented until a few centuries before Columbus will offer the conclusion that two-way transoceanic voyages were improbable to the point of impossibility. The Vikings managed to reach this continent because they skirted the edge of the polar ice and could always be assured of knowing which direction was north. The Polynesians developed their seafaring prowess when their ancestors managed the deep water colonization of Taiwan (Formosa) and then spread out both east as far as Madagascar and west, eventually reaching Hawaii and Easter Island. They acquired a vast storehouse of knowledge of ocean currents, and their culture evolved as an "island hopping" one where populations grew and the surplus moved further out into the Pacific.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2013 05:47PM by SL Cabbie.

. . . of "what-if" speculating, hypothesizing and imagining regarding scenarios designed to support Mormon fantasies which have not been proven out by credible, scientific, investigatory methods.

It is typical blather which leads nowhere but which is comforting to the lazy, uninformed, faithfully-blinded crowd.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2013 06:30PM by steve benson.

chucky Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Over the last century science has been finding out
> one decade after the next the Americas have been
> visited and occupied by old world peoples from
> various places. I don't understand this train of
> thought it has to be proved Israelites never came
> here before Columbus. What if they did?

What if it
> was shown they did come here and breed with
> American Indians 2000 or more years ago, how would
> that prove the BOM true?


> It wouldn't! The only thing that would give credit to the BOM
> being true is if the names of people and places in
> were discovered to exist in ancient writings and
> that hasn't happened.

The fact is, the complete LACK of evidence of any Hebrew colonization of the New World proves the BOM FALSE.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2013 09:16PM by hello.

Lack of evidence proves nothing false. That's the idealism of a shallow mind that will never have an open mind in science nor to have an open mind to understand science; to claim complete lack of evidence proves something/anything totally false.
The Hittites story in the Bible was viewed as a fairy tale story for a long, long time. Suddenly dirt diggers verified the fairy tale in the Bible mentioning a people that actually existed wasn't a fairytale any more.
I realize no-mo apologists here want to really believe that the only existing evidence discovered by science in any field, is only what has been found/discovered as of todate and nothing more will ever be found/discovered to prove present no-mo apologists ideas different/incorrect and or wrong, but that's all based in a pool of shallow thinking.
Circumstantial evidence is being dug up with each passing decade of who may have came to this continent. We have the Olmecs that are a split image for certain African tribes. Elephant head relief carvings have been noted on Mayan/Aztec buildings.
Want to see how non-biased you are? check out this link. This author(a bit into the weird and strange)has actually did some excellent research into parallel art/carvings and architecture between the Balinse and the Mayans. Don't read anything till your done, just scroll down and look at the pictures he has set side by side. Not proof but there is circumstantial evidence for his theory and no, he's not a mo :)
http://www.richardcassaro.com/tag/mayan-art

Chucky said "We have the Olmecs that are a split image for certain African tribes."

Not true. Read this.
http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/current/vansertima.pdf

Pseudo nonsense like you are talking about robs humanity of real achievements of past cultures. The Book of Mormon does that too.

I read that. The information is only 16 years old. Have a more recent link that verifies that 16 year old information is the same and as reliable now as it was 16 years ago? I said the Olmec heads are a split image for some African tribes. I didn't say the Olmec heads were of Africans. Google Olmec heads and click on images. since you disagree, enlighten me as to whom you claim those heads bear a split image to if it isn't certain Africans. I'm open to possibilities, are you? I doubt it.

Chucky said "Have a more recent link that verifies that 16 year old information is the same and as reliable now as it was 16 years ago?"

Absolutely!

Is 2004 recent enough?
http://www.doaks.org/resources/publications/doaks-online-publications/pre-columbian-studies/olmec-art-at-dumbarton-oaks/olmecart.pdf
"The archeological evidence argues for an entirely indigenous development, however, and many Olmec traits are traceable to earlier cultures of Early Formative Mesoamerica. There is simply no material evidence of any Pre-Hispanic contact between the Old World and Mesoamerica before the arrival of the Spanish in the sixteenth century."

Chucky said "I'm open to possibilities, are you? I doubt it."

I'm glad you are open to possibilities, so here is one. Read the abstract to this 2011 article and consider the possibilities that nobody from anywhere other than within America influenced the Olmec.

"High pyramids and great plazas are the hallmarks of ancient Mesoamerica, from the 3000-year-old Olmec cities along the Gulf of Mexico to the inland metropolis of Tenochtitlan encountered by the Spanish conquistadors. Yet the oldest examples that call to mind this familiar style are found nearly 1000 kilometers to the north in the muddy bayous of Louisiana. Five millennia ago, Native Americans here began to build high mounds of earth flanked by flat plazas that resemble Mesoamerica's classic architecture. A small band of archaeologists suspect that these ancient settlements laid the foundation not only for the North American mound-building tradition that eventually culminated in the great city of Cahokia (see main text) but perhaps also for Mesoamerican civilization."
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6063/1620.summary

Why do you have a need to consider the possibility that Africans had made the stone heads? Do you have a reason for not wanting to give proper credit to Indigenous Americans?

. . . lack of semitic DNA for Native Americans or lack of in-the-ground archaeology for Book of Mormon Nephites? (Keep faithfully waiting for the Angel Moroni to return those plates that he squirrled away to heaven and for the real Book of Abraham papyri to someday show up and for . . . you get the drill).

Your "lack-of evidence-doesn't-disprove-anything" approach means you'll believe anything.

Your lack of critical thinking is as stunning as it is silly.

Please apply for a position at FAIR.

Also please pray to the Mormon God to change your head from empty to full.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2013 11:12AM by steve benson.

Steve,

I think Chuck already has a position at the British arm of FAIR, given his posts over the last week or so.

What are you scared of? What causes you to be such a biased and prejudicial thinker concerning science and it's never ending possibilities? You're such a negative no-mo apologist that you have lost any reasoning for being unbiased and non prejudicial. Everything Mormon HAS to be wrong/false to to you.
You are where Bible critics use to be who claimed the entire Bible was a false, wrong, misleading fairy tale created by a bunch of whackos some 1700 years ago or more. Those dead critics of a century ago would be eating their critical words of cynicism today. Bible critics learned fighting the geography and names of people and events wasn't going as good as it use to. So they switched gears and attack the 'god portions' and what still hasn't been proved true to have existed.
You're where they use to be. But you're a typical no-mo apologist critical cynic basing all you believe in on what doesn't exist as being your proof it never existed.
If cynics like you ruled the world as scientists, no one would have explored the dark depths of the ocean floors to see life exists without sunlight, that life does exists in the coldest environments of ice and water, that superheated water actually does afford the existence of life. According to your critical cynicism you would never have allowed any of that info to be found out about by the general public if it had been discovered under your watch of science as you define it, because you would have suppressed the information to maintain your beliefs.
You need to accept a fact as it would help you be less bias and less prejudicial.
What sources Smith used to create the BOM isn't important. It's not important because the BOM factually exists. The fact is that in the 1800s, Smith was the only one that wrote a book of ancient people living on this continent between 600 BCE and 400 CE and got it right. He guessed/speculated of the ancient people on this continent during a specific time period and he got it correct. No other writer in the 18th century wrote a book of the same time period and even came close to getting their information as correct as he did. And according to no-mo apologists like you, all the information he used was available to all others of his time to use to create a similar book as he created.
I think mo-apologists and no-mo apologists waste their time at present. The earth may or may not have secrets to reveal but only time will tell, not opinions. Just saying.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2013 01:54PM by chucky.

This should be good. I'm dying to read thks! PLEASE do tell, Chucky.

Chucky, have you read, "View of the Hebrews", by Ethan Smith? It was published a few years before Joe and Oliver and Sydney started their "Hebrews in America" book.

"View of the Hebrews" covers the exact territory you claim is unique to Smith, and it was published first. In fact, it is obvious that much of the Book of Mormon is based on "View of the Hebrews", and actually seems to be a plagiarism of Ethan Smith's work.

You are making a lot of accusations, and throwing around criticisms of board members, but you are not backing anything up with real data. Visiting a few "fringe archaeology" websites does not constitute an education, Chucky. "Ancient America" magazine doesn't rate as serious science or archaeology. I'm open to real science. Show me some real evidence, not a carving of a bird on a Mayan temple that you think is an elephant.

It would seem that your whole position is based on your simple hope that someday scientists will discover all the proofs and evidences of the reality of the BOM. Good for you, I suppose, but you will understand why rational people find this insufficient to generate belief in wild Mormon theories.

Where is the location of the great BOM city of Zarahemla Chucky? Where is the vast, prosperous City of Nephi? Can you identify even one living Lamanite of Hebrew descent? Can you show us anything at all that is real evidence of BOM peoples and events? Stop slandering me and others on this board, and show us your science, please.

BS. Joe never even came close to getting it right concerning the inhabitants of this continent. Not even close.

You need to remember that there were actual civilizations in the Americas during that time period. They had nothing in common with the civilizations that Joe described.

The "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" argument only weakly works when there isn't a proven alternative. In this case, it fails outright.

chucky Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You need to accept a fact as it would help you be
> less bias and less prejudicial.

I'm sure Steve will answer in his own time but I am genuinely curious as to what fact it is you are talking about here. The fact that the BOM actually exists?

> What sources Smith used to create the BOM isn't
> important. It's not important because the BOM
> factually exists. The fact is that in the 1800s,
> Smith was the only one that wrote a book of
> ancient people living on this continent between
> 600 BCE and 400 CE and got it right.

Really? And where would one find a single piece of evidence of this?

> He guessed/speculated of the ancient people on this
> continent during a specific time period and he got
> it correct. No other writer in the 18th century
> wrote a book of the same time period and even came
> close to getting their information as correct as
> he did.

Once again where would one find a single piece of evidence that he was as correct? At least Ethan Smith was honest enough to label his work fiction.


> And according to no-mo apologists like
> you, all the information he used was available to
> all others of his time to use to create a similar
> book as he........"created."

Emphasis added. Now that is the spirit!


> I think mo-apologists and no-mo apologists waste
> their time at present. The earth may or may not
> have secrets to reveal but only time will tell,
> not opinions. Just saying.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2013 05:46PM by sanitationengineer.

Smith got the time period right for the existence of advanced civilizations existing in the Americas. No one else in the 1800s got that written information as correct as he got it.
See, Smith if playing a guessing game he should have got his 'general' information and timeline totally incorrect. Much of what he wrote concerning these advanced societies, their architecture, their agriculture, their knowledge of astronomy, language and education and trading and wars and human sacrifice, much would be verified took place in his time line in the next century long after he was dead.
None of that proves the BOM true or correct. But Smith was the ONLY author of a 500 plus page book in the 1800s that wrote so extensively of people on this continent before archaeologists had barely turned a spade of dirt and got the basics correct.
I'm not claiming he has had anything proved. But he evidently got the basics correct and no one else did. And all the info available to him was available to everyone else. So how did he do such a great 'guessing' job and no one else did?

"chucky says: But Smith was the ONLY author of a 500 plus page book in the 1800s that wrote so extensively of people on this continent before archaeologists had barely turned a spade of dirt and got the basics correct."

So again, you are just going to ignore "View of the Hebrews"? How...odd...

As noted in the original post, given that (except in your indoctrinated imaginings) there was no Jewish sea voyage from Jersualem to the America courtesy of Lehi's fictional band of merry made-up sailors, all else that follows in the Book of Mormon nutty narrative is therefore unavoidably bogus.

Forget "Reformed Egypttian." You need to learn how to read basic English.

As one critic of this bizarre LDS article of faith observes:

“The Book of Mormon claims to be the most correct book on earth--a history and the keystone of the faith of the Latter-day Saints--and so it has been proclaimed by all the presidents and prophets of the Church since its inception. But with no Israelite migration, all the ensuing stories become fiction. . . . .

“How do LDS respond to this? . . .

“Some have suggested that God changed the DNA [of ‘Lamanites’] to test the faith of Mormons.

“That would make the God who claims to be the embodiment of truth a deceiver.”

(“DNA Research vs. the Book of Mormon: LDS in Trouble Because of DNA Evidence,” at: http://www.mormonsinshock.com/DNABOM.htm)



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2013 07:39PM by steve benson.

You're scared that the reality of gravity will weigh down your attempt to continue your Mormon magic-carpet ride.

There is no serious, peer-reviewed scientific consensus in any reputable professional journal that agrees with your LDS-LSD head-trip fantasy that modern-day Native Americans are genetically related to a small family-clan band of Jews which suppoedly headed out from Arabia to Central America led by some guy named Lehi.

None.

Wake up and smell the Mormon BS.

And please get off this board if you can't resist your continued apologetics campaign for the Mormon Church.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2013 07:40PM by steve benson.

"What sources Smith used to create the BOM isn't important. It's not important because the BOM factually exists."

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,903253,904583#msg-904583


BUSTED!



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2013 08:02PM by steve benson.

Had to change nicknames for some reason not known to me yet.

I first asked you a plausible question. Do you remember what it was before you went wacko? Let me paste it for you again.
" I don't understand this train of thought it has to be proved Israelites never came here before Columbus. What if they did? What if it was shown they did come here and breed with American Indians 2000 or more years ago, how would that prove the BOM true? It wouldn't!"
And then you went totally ballistic whacko calling me a mo-apologist and a troll etc.
I never claimed the BOM true or false. I said there was no evidence for it. I said the BOM factually exists and you went wacko again.
It's quite evident you run with a persecution complex because you have let it be known that you feel I'm persecuting your views as wrong and false and I never said any such thing! lol.
Since you don't seem to have an intelligent grasp on this, I'll email admin with my statements/questions to you and all your responses back to me and let them figure you out, that would be the right thing to do.

. . . that "[t]he BOM factually exists" but that "there's "no evidence for it."

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,903253,904583#msg-904583

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,903253,906446#msg-906446

Huh?
_____


"Whacky Chucky," "montanan" or whatever your temple name is, you are suffering from self-contradicting, implausible denial, exacerbated by your obvious failure to do basic homework.

Might want to start here:

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,906284



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2013 04:18AM by steve benson.

I've read the BofM and it gives the reader the impression that there were no indigent peoples when Nephi arrives - other than the last survivor of the Jaredites. Also, it implies if not states that the Nephites filled the whole land North, South, East and West. DNA aside, I think there would be mounds of evidence supporting the BofM claims. This is not some obscure tribe that lived and died a long time ago, but a nation of people that lived all over the New World and is still here today (supposedly). Unfortunately, there is no evidence of their existence - no old world language, writings, religion, customs, coins, etc. nada, zilch, zippo. New Hope ministries did a great DVD series on this subject. It was even hosted by a Mormon archeologist who came up with the same conclusions - no Hebrews, Nephites, or anything remotely Book of Mormonish anywhere in the new world. They even mentioned that the church did a little excavation around the Hill Cumorah, but didn't give it much of an effort as he thought that the church knew it wouldn't find anything either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2013 06:02PM by drilldoc.

The BOM does give an explicit impression that no one was on this continent before the BOM groups, I totally agree. But we know native peoples existed and were very well populated especially in Mexico and Central and South America.
The book doesn't say it but the BOM people would have did as most advanced people coming to a new land, they would have mixed with the indigenous people sooner than later.
As for sounding like they were spread out to the four compass points, it sounds like it but I doubt it myself. To my reading of the story, Nephi and his family began at one point and were continuously chased as the story evolves by wars so the ancestors Moroni ended up at a totally different local.
As to mounds of evidence that should exist, the Hittite empire for example covered most of Asia Minor till they literally became extinct. No evidence was to be found of this expansive civilization that existed for about 600 years till it's demise in 1200 BCE until the 19th century.
The BOM is only about 180 years old. America Archaeology is still in it's infancy.
I know no physical evidence exists to prove cities and places and people in the BOM don't exist. But for me, that doesn't mean they didn't. It just means nothing has been found as of yet. That makes nothing true or false in my book.

chucky Wrote:

>> As to mounds of evidence that should exist, the
> Hittite empire for example covered most of Asia
> Minor till they literally became extinct. No
> evidence was to be found of this expansive
> civilization that existed for about 600 years till
> it's demise in 1200 BCE until the 19th century.

The evidence was there (in Anatolia), and had been found by many people. But 19th century European scholars (those latecomers) just didn't understand what they were looking at fully, until more pieces of the puzzle were discovered. By the early 20th century, scholars understood the existence and extent of the Hittite empire quite well. They learned such things by examining actual evidence found in situ.

In the Americas, the landscape has been pretty well surveyed. There may yet be new discoveries of jungle-clad city states in Brazil, or even MesoAmerica. But given the current archaeological record, there is so far no reason to believe that any such cities will be much different in any significant ways from the ones already discovered and studied extensively.

So that's where a comparison of the archaeology of the Hittite empire and the cities of the BOM breaks down. In Anatolia, archaeologists actually studied the real, on the ground evidences, and pieced together the story of the Hittite empire. In America, archaeologists actually studied the real, on the ground evidences, and pieced together the story of the Mayans, Aztecs, Toltecs and Olmecs, and their empires (not to leave out the many other early American civilizations scattered across the continent). The problem for the advocates of the BOM fictions, is that none of these civilizations bears the slightest resemblance to anything in the BOM.

> The BOM is only about 180 years old. America
> Archaeology is still in it's infancy.

American Archaeology is at least as old as Near Eastern archaeology was during the seminal discoveries of the Hittite remains. 200 years of American archaeology, and zero evidence for the BOM myths.

> I know no physical evidence exists to prove cities
> and places and people in the BOM don't exist.

Not clear on what you are trying to say here.

But
> for me, that doesn't mean they didn't. It just
> means nothing has been found as of yet. That makes
> nothing true or false in my book.

And I fear that will likely remain true for you, chucky, as long as there remains one tiny pebble that has not yet been turned over on the whole continent, in the search for "BOM evidences".

Hello wrote:

1, "The evidence was there (in Anatolia), and had been found by many people. But 19th century European scholars (those latecomers) just didn't understand what they were looking at fully, until more pieces of the puzzle were discovered. By the early 20th century, scholars understood the existence and extent of the Hittite empire quite well. They learned such things by examining actual evidence found in situ."

1a. And your point is that you claim the Hittite's had been already discovered long before even though no one knew who they were and, while scientists and critics were all the while claiming those already discovered remains didn't exist they actually did exist, still making the Bible correct without anyone knowing it? Was that your point :)

2. "In the Americas, the landscape has been pretty well surveyed. There may yet be new discoveries of jungle-clad city states in Brazil, or even MesoAmerica. But given the current archaeological record, there is so far no reason to believe that any such cities will be much different in any significant ways from the ones already discovered and studied extensively."

2a. There may yet be new discoveries of jungle clad city states in Brazil? So your insinuation is nothing is to be found anywhere else in the Americas? You did state..."In the Americas, the landscape has been pretty well surveyed." meaning surveyed land is thoroughly explored land? Was that what you meant? And then you localized the remaining 'unexplored' areas to be ..."in Brazil, or even MesoAmerica." and nowhere else? Is that what you meant? That your insinuation is there is nothing more to be found within the borders of the US or Canada or Greenland or Alaska that may show evidence of things not dreamed of existing or denied could ever have existed? Was that your meaning?


3. So that's where a comparison of the archaeology of the Hittite empire and the cities of the BOM breaks down.

3a. Breaks down? How can it be broken down? That's an impossibility. Nothing of the BOM geography, cities etc has ever been found to have existed at present. So you can't logically compare what actually exists of the Hittites to what doesn't exist of the BOM.

4. American Archaeology is at least as old as Near Eastern archaeology was during the seminal discoveries of the Hittite remains. 200 years of American archaeology, and zero evidence for the BOM myths.

4a. If you're speaking of when the actual 'science' of archaeology took off I'll agree. But since I was referencing people/persons traveling to distant places and bringing home their findings and or giving them to local museums, that being the beginning of what the science of archaeology would become but more refined, I'll disagree. Rulers and people were digging up the old world's ancient past since the fifth century. People began to do the same thing in America in the 16th century beginning with the notable Thomas Jefferson in the late 1700s.
So what I said stands, America is still in it's infancy of being discovered.

5. Not clear on what you are trying to say here.

5a. I said "I know no physical evidence exists to prove cities
and places and people in the BOM don't exist." I said that because people keep saying there's proof the contents of the BOM never existed/happened. I stated I have never seen proof evidence that shows what doesn't exist, never existed.

6. And I fear that will likely remain true for you, chucky, as long as there remains one tiny pebble that has not yet been turned over on the whole continent, in the search for "BOM evidences".

6a. What fascinates me is the time that people will spend trying to prove the present unproved doesn't exist, never existed and could never have existed. That is what fascinates me, not the BOM :)

. . sporting a loincloth and a brown-turned-white-and-delightsome shaved head, preaching from the tops of walls like his relative, Samuel the Lamanite. His chosen apostles will examine the nail prints in his hands and feet and come upon his Lamanite DNA.

Then "Montana Chucky" will finally be proven right.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2013 05:02AM by steve benson.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=261GDx8pF4I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV1NYP60274

even Hugh Nibley said this MORmON was stretching things
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BQrl4EZ07Y



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/23/2013 01:47AM by lucky.

So when the gene/shape shifting allegedly occurred, how would the relatives of the changlings recognize their relatives post-gene shift? I mean, one day your husband looks middle eastern, then whammo, he's an asian. You wake up and there's this strange dude in your bed and you're like: Hey, who are you and how did you get in the house?

And how did the Nephites recognize the post-shift lamanites as lamanites since they wouldn't have looked anything like the Laman and Lemuel they all knew? Even if they did DNA tests on them, they would have though they were not related.

Holy smoke[screen]! I'm going to rush right out to my nearest genetic testing lab to see if my genes have morphed. Now that I'm more house-bound, my tan has faded too. Perhaps I'm becoming more "delightsome" as I age.

To say that I've been insulted "twice" by the Church is a gross understatement -- first by the 19th century lie that Lamanites are cursed, inferior, loathsome and evil -- and now by the 21st century lie that our genes are shape-shifting.

What's that saying? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

In the LDS faith, shame is the name of the game.

Well, shapeshifting Native Americans is prevalent in popular culture. At least it's not eagles, or wolves.

Not sure what the big deal is about God changing skin color from dark to more delightsome...Michael Jackson is proof of that...

What is so hard to believe? If God can change skin color, he can also change DNA to try the faith of his followers to sift out the weak ones...Lacking faith = weakness...the human brain will do amazing things to rectify a perceived weakness...Oh, no brother man...I Am STONG in da Faith...No apostate is gonna "tear down my faith" with all this fancy DNA talk...The book is Blue, MJ's skin changed from dark to white and the Church is Trwooo. Period!

Lack of evidence doesn't disprove; it invalidates.

Mormonism is truly the religion of excuses. Time after time after time Mormon apologists have to come up with excuses and justifications ranging from total bullshit to merely absurd to attempt to respond to issues going from DNA to the Book of Abraham; to the Jeredites coming to America in miniature submarines with all their animals from the nonexistent Tower of Babel; to the Garden of Eden in Missouri to the Earth being only 6000 years old; to all but one Jeredite and all the Nephites being killed in battles on and around the Hill Cumorah in New York; to the Lamanites being cursed with a black skin; to denying blacks the priesthood for well over a hundred years; to Joseph's plagerism of hundreds of verses from the 1769 edition of the King James Bible, including its errors; to Laban's miraculously non-bloody clothes; to Alma's ridiculous stories being a rip off of Paul; to Christ coming to America and destroying 16 cities and killing tens of thousands of people; to Christ still having his crucifixion wounds after he was resurrected; to 2500 people standing in line for hours to thrust their hands into the wounds in his side; to the Three Nephites still being alive; to Joseph Smith's fraudulent claim of his First Vision and his many contradictory versions of it; to God commanding him on penalty of death to have sex with all the teenage wives and wives of other men; to the made up stories of angelic restoration of the priesthoods; to the Kinderhook Plates; to Brigham Young's claim that racial intermarriage meant instant death; and on and on and on. My God, it just never stops. All of this and hundreds of other things prove Mormonism is absolutely a fraud. But, you don't need any of this. Just read the Book of Mormon with half a critical brain. It is total nonsense and screams fraud from just about every page.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2013 07:05PM by Tonto Schwartz.

But remember the members of the church aren't perfect, the church is...oh wait yeah never mind, just believe and pay your tithing!