Book of Mormon geography

[_Tobin]

The descendants of the Meso-American civilizations are still there. Their cultural histories are documented. Those major civilizations were in full flower when the Spanish found them. Their writings have been deciphered. There is no mystery.

What writings are you referring to exactly? As far as I know, virtually all written texts were burned.

Catholic missionaries did a very good job of documenting those civilizations first hand when they first contacted them. We have ruins, writings, artifacts, written catholic histories and cultural histories to explain who these people were (and still are).
If you spend a little while researching the topic, Tobin, you won't sound so foolish in these posts.

And this has nothing to do with my contention that a civilization 1000 years apart has anything to do with an earlier civilization. I'll say it again, it is like taking a look at modern Egyptian Muslim civilization and using that as the basis for understanding ancient Egyptian civilization.

[_beastie]

Have you studied Mesoamerican history at all?

I'd be happy to. Would you like to point me at the great accounts of the history of Mesoamerica as witnessed by whom exactly? What independent book written so long ago do you have for us all to read? The problem you have beastie is they don't exist at all. Your independent history of Mesoamerica was never written unfortunately and all we have are ruins to speculate about.

I'm assuming this is your coy way of admitting you've done no serious reading on the subject.

If you can decode Mayan glyphs, then travel down there and do it. Return and report.

Otherwise, you're going to have to rely on the explanations of those who actually can. Feel free to visit my website and look at my bibliography for some recommendations.

And, by the way, you might want to throw in a book or two about how archaeology works.

My suspicion is growing that you are simply repeating what you've heard some apologists say.

[_Tobin]

...

So, in other words, you have nothing to show but a scattered understanding of some depictions on the ruins and stela, which I already knew about.

[_Quasimodo]

What writings are you referring to exactly? As far as I know, virtually all written texts were burned.

Just my point, Tobin. You don't know much. Not all the Mayan codices were destroyed, some survived. Plus, the Mayan temples are covered with texts. I've given you ample links to articles in the past that refute all your comments, but it seems that you didn't take the time to read them. Your still making it up as you go along.

And this has nothing to do with my contention that a civilization 1000 years apart has anything to do with an earlier civilization. I'll say it again, it is like taking a look at modern Egyptian Muslim civilization and using that as the basis for understanding ancient Egyptian civilization.

Your contention is adolescent. All current cultures have connections to their antecedence cultures going back thousands of years (look up the history of English). Current Egyptian culture has many remnants of the ancient Egyptian culture (not to mention the historical evidence the under their feet).

Stop posting drivel, learn something and then we'll chat.

[_Tobin]

Just my point, Tobin. You don't know much. Not all the Mayan codices were destroyed, some survived. Plus, the Mayan temples are covered with texts. I've given you ample links to articles in the past that refute all your comments, but it seems that you didn't take the time to read them. Your still making it up as you go along.

Thank you for your speculation that I'm unaware of the state of the field, but despite your assertions I do have more than a passing interest in it. And I'm aware of only three codexs that survived (wow - that's it folks!!!). I have also seen the attempts at translation of some of the depictions and they think the Book of Mormon is hard to understand? It is clearly a work in progress and in its infancy. I look forward to what will eventually be published, but I don't think a good picture will exist any time soon.

Your contention is adolescent. All current cultures have connections to their antecedence cultures going back thousands of years (look up the history of English). Current Egyptian culture has many remnants of the ancient Egyptian culture (not to mention the historical evidence the under their feet).

On what basis do you find asserting that modern Muslim civilization is a good place to start in understanding ancient Egyptian civilization and culture? What about the two civilizations, other than human beings are involved and they live there makes that a great way to understand the older civilization? You devolved your reason for doing so by attacking my assertion as being adolescent. If that is it, then I really have nothing to worry about and I'll maintain that it makes no sense to do so and is unlikely to yield anything but false conclusions on any range of topics from religion to the political relationships they have with their neighbors and how they react.

[_Quasimodo]

Thank you for your speculation that I'm unaware of the state of the field, but despite your assertions I do have more than a passing interest in it. And I'm aware of only three codexs that survived (wow - that's it folks!!!). I have also seen the attempts at translation of some of the depictions and they think the Book of Mormon is hard to understand? It is clearly a work in progress and in its infancy. I look forward to what will eventually be published, but I don't think a good picture will exist any time soon.

You are PAINFULLY unaware of the "state of the field". If you want to discuss this subject intelligently, you will have to do some reading. A hint, don't just read spurious articles that support your preconceived ideas.

On what basis do you find asserting that modern Muslim civilization is a good place to start in understanding ancient Egyptian civilization and culture?

I didn't say that. I said that there is a large amount of ancient Egyptian culture that still permeates through the existing Egyptian culture. Your ignorance is still showing.

I wonder who you are addressing. I guess there may be readers on this board that might not have much knowledge of the subject, but to anyone that does (reread the thread), you sound uneducated.

[Guest]

You are PAINFULLY unaware of the "state of the field". If you want to discuss this subject intelligently, you will have to do some reading. A hint, don't just read spurious articles that support your preconceived ideas.

I appreciate your opinion on what I may or may not know and what my background is and what I may or may not have read, but as you have no idea what you are talking about I'll give it all the consideration it deserves.

I didn't say that. I said that there is a large amount of ancient Egyptian culture that still permeates through the existing Egyptian culture. Your ignorance is still showing.

Again, making generalizations without any specifics and stating I'm ignorant doesn't help your case. I really wonder if you should look in the mirror and consider who is acting like an adult here. Name calling is beneath you. But, if that is the best you can do on this topic, I feel sorry for you.

I wonder who you are addressing. I guess there may be readers on this board that might not have much knowledge of the subject, but to anyone that does (reread the thread), you sound uneducated.

Again, no specifics. No arguments countering mine. No responses to my questions. Not even a justification for your own assertions. Just more name calling. Is this how you approach all topics you claim to be expert in? Is anyone that questions your "expertness" uneducated just because they dare question your unqualified assertions and baseless generalizations?

[_Quasimodo]

I appreciate your opinion on what I may or may not know and what my background is and what I may or may not have read, but as you have no idea what you are talking about I'll give it all the consideration it deserves.

It's obvious, Tobin, to anyone that has some knowledge of the subject, that you don't know what you're talking about. Again, reread the thread.

Again, making generalizations without an specifics and stating I'm ignorant doesn't help your case. I really wonder if you should look in the mirror and consider who is acting like an adult here. Name calling is beneath you. But, if that is the best you can do on this topic, I feel sorry for you.

Sorry, I have always had a deep love of history, archaeology, and anthropology. When someone distorts the known history of a culture in an attempt to defend his own preconceived religious notions it puts me off.

Again, no specifics. No arguments. No responses to my questions. Not even a justification for you assertions. Just more name calling. Is this how you approach all topics you claim to be expert in? Is anyone that questions your "expertness" uneducated just because they dare question your unqualified assertions and baseless generalizations?

In the past, I have given you many justifications, links to articles and suggestions on further reading. All ignored. You have proven your ignorance in history more than a few times (Clovis points?). On this thread, others have supplied you with links and reliable data that you have also ignored.

I don't claim to be an expert (I do personally know a few). I do consider myself a very well read amateur Archaeologist. I work with and have associations with several professional Archaeologists.

There are many people on this board whose opinion on these matters I find valuable. Your opinion is based on supporting your own dodgy beliefs without any understanding of the subject that you are pontificating about.

I don't think you realize how foolish you sound to anyone with any knowledge of the subject.

[_Tobin]

It's obvious, Tobin, to anyone that has some knowledge of the subject, that you don't know what you're talking about. Again, reread the thread.

Stating an assertion twice doesn't make it any more valid than the first time you do it. Are you actually going to make a point anywhere in my future that I can respond to?

In the past, I have given you many justifications, links to articles and suggestions on further reading. All ignored. You have proven your ignorance in history more than a few times (Clovis points?). On this thread, others have supplied you with links and reliable data that you have also ignored.

And I have read those links and apologized when I found I was in error. However, stating that the field of Mesoamerican studies and archeology is not nearly as well developed and understood as other areas in archeology such as Egyptology is not outlandish. Stating that there are large gaps in our knowledge about these societies and their history due to the lack or non-existence in many cases of authors and witnesses to the events is not bizarre. Stating that I believe ultimately the Book of Mormon will shown to be correct (on a Mormon discussion forum) shouldn't be surprising.

Now, you may not believe it Quasi, but I am interested in the truth. But don't expect me to just accept notions competely unfiltered and unquestioned. What I see here is an area in a scientific field and study that in many ways is still in its infancy and not nearly as developed and definitive as the critics would like to pretend. I believe there are a lot more things to be discovered in it and these discoveries may yet dramatically change the prevailing view of these people.

[_Morley]

It's obvious, Tobin, to anyone that has some knowledge of the subject, that you don't know what you're talking about. Again, reread the thread.

Stating an assertion twice doesn't make it any more valid than the first time you do it. Are you actually going to make a point anywhere in my future that I can respond to?

In the past, I have given you many justifications, links to articles and suggestions on further reading. All ignored. You have proven your ignorance in history more than a few times (Clovis points?). On this thread, others have supplied you with links and reliable data that you have also ignored.

And I have read those links and apologized when I found I was in error. However, stating that the field of Mesoamerican studies and archeology is not nearly as well developed and understood as other areas in archeology such as Egyptology is not outlandish. Stating that there are large gaps in our knowledge about these societies and their history due to the lack or non-existence in many cases of authors and witnesses to the events is not bizarre. Stating that I believe ultimately the Book of Mormon will shown to be correct (on a Mormon discussion forum) shouldn't be surprising.

Now, you may not believe it Quasi, but I am interested in the truth. But don't expect me to just accept notions competely unfiltered and unquestioned. What I see here is an area in a scientific field and study that in many ways is still in its infancy and not nearly as developed and definitive as the critics would like to pretend. I believe there are a lot more things to be discovered in it and these discoveries may yet dramatically change the prevailing view of these people.

Tobin. Where did you get the idea that "Mesoamerican studies and archaeology is not nearly as well developed and understood as other areas in archaeology such as Egyptology"? Why do you think this?