Tobin wrote:KevinSim,
As you can see, most of the people here are repeating the arguments I've already identified. And as I said, I don't find them very compelling.
We are talking about relatively narrow locality in which the means of transporation is BY FOOT in the Book of Mormon. These people were within a very short distance of each other and the Book of Mormon does not indicate any large use of horses outside very specific uses. It seems that very select and elite individuals used them to pull a chariot for example. That is probably the extent of the technical means they possessed. The response to that is well, they would have generally been used in war because of their large advantages. Given the terrain, chariots may of been of little use. And to fight from horseback using other weapons requires a horse culture (which isn't indicated in the Book of Mormon) and certain technology that they did not possess. For example, to fight from horseback using a bow requires a recurved bow.
The only other new argument is that native varieties of horses went extinct so that means there were no horses. That is a rather silly argument. Horses could have been brought here after that point (and it would also explain the highly localized nature of their appearance too).
Tobin,
What is it about that you don't understand about the scientific fact that pre-Columbian humans in the New World saw horses as food and drove them extinct some 11,000 to 13,000 years ago?
Did you not read the fact that the first response of Amerindians when they came upon stray horses that were offspring of the horses brought over by the Spaniards was to eat those horses?
Do you not understand that the Native American Indians had to be taught by example to domesticate and ride horses rather than to kill them for food?
What is it about the statement, "No horses in the New World between 8,000 BC years ago and 1526 or so AD" that you don't understand?
Before you come up with anymore off the wall, "world according to Tobin / just so" stories, why don't you read what I wrote above (just for you), and then show some objective evidence to refute it? Show some evidence to back your claims, for once.
Continuing to make silly speculations that can be shown to be wrong just continues to damage whatever shred of credibility you might have left on this issue.

