Keith A. Crandall's Careless DNA Claims

[_DrW]

All Quasimodo is going to teach you how to do is to make snide comments. He is completely incapable of sustaining an argument or making valid points.

.

[_Tobin]

What scientific setting am I correcting him in?

However, as I said, he is not doing this in a professional scientific setting and it is up to him to correct his statements if he wishes.

How am I drumming up support for censure from his peers?

Several of them know because I have emailed them. I doubt very much that they will want to get involved. I am certain it annoys them but they typically steer clear of religious controversies. You never know who is going to review your next research paper or grant application.

How about your read my post before you write this stuff.

It would help immensely if you'd take your own advice and read what I've said. It would also help if you remembered what you've done as well.

[_aussieguy55]

Simon can you comment on this from the "other" board

"Perhaps I wasn't clear, or didn't explain myself clearly. The church's DNA / Book of Mormon essay (here) does a great job outlining the problems of using DNA to prove / disprove the Book of Mormon. In addition to the problem determining what Lehi companies DNA looked like, it includes a section titled Population Bottleneck and Genetic Drift. Both of these are well studied ideas in biology and they basically mean that much of our ancestor's DNA gets lost over time. So even if we assume Lehi had middle eastern DNA, we shouldn't necessarily expect to see that DNA in modern population because the alleles we use as markers might be driven to extinction by genetic drift or a population bottleneck. "