Yahoo Bot wrote:The "Levant" is an expression for the middle east from Turkey to the Arabian peninsula. That's the depth of your analysis, to see if that word is in there?
.....and you still avoid providing the paragraph in the link that backs your claim. Are you not up to a simple request?
The Internet LDS Apologists have stated that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica.
The Following is from the LDS Apologist Jeff Lindsay:
So many misunderstandings of the DNA-Book of Mormon issue derive from misunderstanding what the Book of Mormon says. Part of this misunderstanding involves the issue of geography and scope of the Book of Mormon. As Book of Mormon students increasingly understand that the Book of Mormon actually describes a very limited geographical area in its accounts, and as they increasingly recognize that Mesoamerica (southern Mexico, Guatemala, and surrounding territory) offers the best candidate for the setting of the Book of Mormon, they also recognize that the DNA attacks on the Book of Mormon have very limited impact when the text is properly understood. Our critics have accused us of backpedaling, revisionism, and a desperate retreat in favoring a limited geography instead of the once common but sloppy hemispheric model for the Book of Mormon (where South America was the "land southward" and North America was the "land northward," Panama was the narrow neck, and Lamanites were battling Nephites across thousands of miles of territory, and where the whole continent had nothing but pure Israelite genes--none of which is supported by the text!). But they are simply wrong. While the Church has never taken an official position on the geography of the Book of Mormon (contrary to errant insinuations or claims of some people peddling errant models centered in North America), we can look to Joseph Smith himself for the idea that Mesoamerica might be considered as the land of the Nephites, and apparently even for the idea that Zarahemla, in the "land southward," might be north of Panama in Mesoamerica. The DNA debate is best understood by understanding the origins and history of the Limited Geography Model of the Book of Mormon. Recent contributions in understanding these topics comes from John Tvedtnes' excellent article, "A Brief History of the Limited Geographic View of the Book of Mormon." Equally valuable is Ted Dee Stoddard's "Joseph Smith and John Lloyd Stephens," which shows the impact that a Mesoamerican explorer had on Joseph Smith's understanding of the Book of Mormon and its geography - over a decade after the text was published. It provides insights into what Joseph Smith said or approved of saying in the LDS publication, Times and Seasons, during the time when Joseph acted as its editor. It's a fascinating story worth careful consideration.
The Following are from the LDS Apologists Matthew Roper and John L. Sorenson:
2. Do all of the geographical facts sketched in the Nephite account agree with any actual location in the Americas? With more than one?
That the inhabitants of Book of Mormon lands knew and used formal writing systems and compiled numerous books (see Helaman 3:15) restricts the possible real-world location to Mesoamerica6 (central and southern Mexico and northern Central America). In Mesoamerica there were thousands of books in use at the time of the Spanish Conquest, but nowhere else in the Western Hemisphere is there convincing evidence for genuine writing being used on a consistent basis. In addition to writing, other social and cultural conditions required by the scriptural text to be present in the Nephite homeland area confirm Mesoamerica as the only plausible location of Book of Mormon lands.
In addition to the cultural criteria, only in that area can all of the geographical requirements be met. For example, only in Mesoamerica are there lands of appropriate scale (that is, several hundreds, but not thousands, of miles in extent) that can appropriately be said to be "nearly surrounded by water" (Alma 22:32), as well as an isthmus bounded by Pacific and Atlantic waters.
Ingenious and impassioned arguments have been mustered in support of other theorized areas (from the Great Lakes to Peru or encompassing the entire hemisphere) as the scene for Nephite history. But every proposed geographical setting other than Mesoamerica fails to meet the criteria established by the text of Mormon's account.7 So while it is theoretically possible that another area of the New World could meet the criteria to be the historical Nephite and Lamanite lands, it has proved impossible to identify any such territory. All proposed locations other than Mesoamerica suffer from fatal flaws.
DNA scientists can be confident that all or part of Mesoamerica was where the Nephite and Lamanite peoples took on their historical identities and where their history recorded in the Book of Mormon was played out, although their descendants might have spread into other New World zones and additional peoples might have migrated to Mesoamerica from other regions.
...
Is it possible that what archaeologists refer to as cultural "influences" spread by some indirect means, like pollen in the wind? The answer seems clear to us that in some circumstances human agents were necessary to convey such influences between distant points. Because the cultural items shared were so detailed and elaborate, it is most reasonable to suppose that actual persons carried specific knowledge from Mexico to Arizona or New Mexico.10 It is quite certain that those persons who acted as transfer agents frequently also passed their genes into the local pool at the destination.11 In any case, DNA scientists ought not to exclude the possibility that genetic carriers from Mesoamerica reached other areas.
Yahoo Bot wrote:The "Levant" is an expression for the middle east from Turkey to the Arabian peninsula. That's the depth of your analysis, to see if that word is in there?
Yahoobot, I "second" the request for the section of the article you'd like to get Simon to respond to. It is a big article and you seem to have seen something specific that suggested a connection between "Amerinds and the Levant" so it probably shouldn't be too much trouble to direct us to the part of the article that you found interesting. And, I am not doing detailed analysis of all the article that is unrelated to your post, and I'd bet Simon isn't either. Thanks.
Yahoo Bot wrote:The "Levant" is an expression for the middle east from Turkey to the Arabian peninsula. That's the depth of your analysis, to see if that word is in there?
.....and you still avoid providing the paragraph in the link that backs your claim. Are you not up to a simple request?
YB,
If you would have bothered to read the caption to Figure 4 in Simon's blog post, or understood what was stated in the Wiki article to which you referred, you would have been able to answer your own question.
Arrakis has it right. Any human DNA originating in the Lavant came to the pre-Columbian New World more than 13,000 years ago by way of Beringia, not 4,000 - 5,000 years or so ago on an imaginary Nephite sailing ship or (even sillier) on a wooden Jaredite semi-submersible. _____________
ETA: It is not as if the critics, including Simon and a few others, have not gone over this ground several times on this board in the last few years. This has been done in detail and with references to the peer reviewed literature.
Last edited by Guest on Fri Jun 06, 2014 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."
DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
If you would have bothered to read the caption to Figure 4 in Simon's blog post, or understood what was stated in the Wiki article to which you referred, you would have been able to answer your own question.
Arrakis has it right. Any human DNA originating in the Lavant came to the pre-Columbian New World more than 13,000 years ago by way of Beringia, not 4,000 - 5,000 years or so ago on an imaginary Nephite sailing ship or (even sillier) on a wooden Jaredite semi-submersible.
Hi DrW,
I remember your Thread about the Jaredite barges here.
The Internet LDS Apologists have stated that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica.
So what? I said, "Bad science is trying to misuse science to prove or disprove religious claims". There is plenty of bad science going on here.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
GrandMoffTarkin wrote:Okay, I'm going to need an explanation
I said, "Bad science is trying to misuse science to prove or disprove religious claims". You asked that I provide an example. If you follow that link, there is an example.
How is it bad science? How is he misusing science?
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence - Hitch
Tobin wrote:I said, "Bad science is trying to misuse science to prove or disprove religious claims". You asked that I provide an example. If you follow that link, there is an example.
How is it bad science? How is he misusing science?
The DNA studies were not designed to prove or disprove the claims of the Book of Mormon. The studies were trying to determine the ancestry of select groups of native American populations. It is a misuse of these studies to use them to attack the religious convictions of people that believe that a small group of people, were lead by God no less, to this continent a few thousand years ago. Whether or not a group of people travelled here a few thousand years ago has nothing to do with these studies. They may have simply had no interaction with the people being sampled at all. That is why it is bad science and shouldn't be done.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
If you would have bothered to read the caption to Figure 4 in Simon's blog post, or understood what was stated in the Wiki article to which you referred, you would have been able to answer your own question.
Arrakis has it right. Any human DNA originating in the Lavant came to the pre-Columbian New World more than 13,000 years ago by way of Beringia, not 4,000 - 5,000 years or so ago on an imaginary Nephite sailing ship or (even sillier) on a wooden Jaredite semi-submersible.
Hi DrW,
I remember your Thread about the Jaredite barges here.
Lately, I have been thinking about a similar commentary on the Nephite transoceanic journey, and more specifically, on the Old Word part of the fable. I spent most of 2012 in Oman consulting on projects in the Al Wusta and Dhofar regions. I saw first hand what the coastline and landscape looks like down around Salalah and Khor Rori, where the Mopologists assure faithful saints that the Nephites built their oceangoing ship.
What a joke.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."
DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
I hate that I appreciate the entertainment value of some posters. I suspect we love their participation for the same reasons so many watch this kind of stuff.