DiscussMormonism.com

An Evening With Daniel C. Peterson

Tonight I was fortunate to attend an event held at the Olivewood Bookstore in Provo, Utah. The featured speaker was, as you can guess by the thread title, Dr. Daniel C. Peterson. The subject was DNA and the Book of Mormon. This lecture was most likely inspired by the (somewhat) recent publication of the Maxwell Institute's book, The Book of Mormon and DNA Research, edited by (who else?) Daniel C. Peterson. The book is a collection of essays related to DNA and the Book of Mormon that have been published over the years in either the FARMS Review or the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies.

Rommelator was at the back of the room digitally recording the proceedings, and he afterward informed me that it'd be uploaded to both FAIR's YouTube channel and also to Google Video by no later than tomorrow night. So, since you all will be able to see it for yourselves anyway, there's no real need for me to go into the same level of detail that I went into for the John Gee presentation.

To pique your interest, here's a very brief overview of some points:

INTRODUCTION:

• He anticipated many people's question by asking it on their behalf: "Why am I giving this lecture?" He answered, "Because I was asked." He also indicated that he was probably the natural choice to present this lecture because "DNA" is an anagram of "Dan." :-)

CHRONOLOGY:

• DCP first heard of the Book of Mormon/DNA issue from Ed Decker's newsletter. He presciently recognized that it was an issue worth paying attention to, although no one else on either side really cared much about it at the time.
• He later noticed that the critics were beginning to pick up on it in a big way, but was nevertheless unable to get his pro-LDS colleagues to take notice of it.
• He later discovered, to his surprise, that there was considerable international media interest in it, upon which he was finally able to convince his pro-LDS colleagues to become involved.

THEMES:

• DCP talked about how most people nowadays were raised with the impression that there's always been a constant war of science vs. religion. He talked about how, in reality, that's not quite true: Many of the leading religionists were scientists and vice-versa. For example, one of Galileo's chief defenders later became the pope, etc.
• Probably the overarching thread that permeated the entire presentation was the unreliability of genetic testing. The major example he used is the population of Iceland, all of whose populace born after 1972, 131,060 of them, have been genetically tested. I GOT VERY CONFUSED ABOUT THIS NEXT PART, but I THINK he described how matrilineal (X-chromosome) lines traced pervasively to a group who arrived, or were living there, three or so centuries ago (he gave the years, but I can't remember them), and how, similarly, patrilineal (Y-chromosome) lines traced pervasively to a group who arrived, or were living there, sometime slightly earlier. Nevertheless, no genetic link could be established to specific individuals from that era. IF THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, THEN IT'S PROBABLY BECAUSE I'M CONFUSED, NOT THAT THE PRESENTATION WAS IN ERROR. He added that the written genealogical records trace back to these folks, but DNA testing doesn't bear it out.
• With that in mind, it's vastly more difficult to trace genetic lines back to a specific family that lived many centuries earlier than that, especially A) due to the fact that we know nothing about Ishmael's wife, and B) due to the Native Americans' genetic bottleneck that occurred post-1492.

OTHER ITEMS:

• Throughout the presentation, DCP quoted several things that online critics have said vis-a-vis this issue.
• Unlike during the John Gee presentation, there was no formal Question and Answer session afterward.

IF I HAVE RECALLED ANYTHING INCORRECTLY, THEN CORRECTIONS (by those in attendance) ARE BOTH WELCOME AND APPRECIATED.

So, that was the presentation itself. Not long after it got underway, someone in the audience whispered to another member of the audience, "He was one of the presenters at the FAIR Conference." So apparently FAIR, or at least their conferences, are rather well recognized among the faithful--or, at least those faithful enough to attend a presentation like this.

Afterward, I overheard one attendee gushing about DCP to another attendee. Although I can't recall the specific words used, he was going on and on about how much DCP has done ("for the church," I presume), what a great brother (i.e., church-wise) he is, etc.

Here are some luminaries who were also there:

• Rommelator, whom I already mentioned. After we discussed his recording and when/where it would be online, he referred to the fact that I had already greeted him by his online name and then asked if I had an online name myself. He was somewhat surprised when I said "Dr. Shades." Later he asked if the thread here about him went anywhere past the first couple of pages, 'cause he quit reading after that, and I mistakenly told him it hadn't. Now that I've checked again, I see that it went to five pages. OOPS!
• Brant Gardner.
• M. Gerald Bradford, executive director of the Maxwell Institute. He gave the opening prayer.
• George L. Mitton, one of the editors of the FARMS Review and occasional author therein.
• Louis Midgley. As he approached, Rommelator introduced me to him. He said, "This is Dr. Shades!" Dr. Midgley said, "You don't remember me, but we've met." I said, "Oh yeah, I remember." We were referring to a brief e-mail exchange we had several years ago, back even before ZLMB came into its own. At any rate, around the snack table, I made small talk by asking how New Zealand was, since he had a stint there as its CES Director. We talked quite a bit about its geography and weather.
• Richard Lloyd Anderson, author of "Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses, a book that DCP has enthusiastically recommended several times over the years. I'm telling you, a kinder, warmer, friendlier, and nicer man you couldn't possibly meet. After I told him my name, he asked me for my last name, what I do for a living, where I work, etc. (Professor Midgley got to hear all this, too!) He made the effort, repeatedly, to ensure that he correctly remembered my name, even after I made it clear him that I'm nobody of any consequence. Our brief interaction may not qualify me to make this observation, but if it's possible to "radiate Christlike-ness," then he did it. Of course, he didn't know that I was "Dr. Shades," though :-)
• DCP's wife, name withheld for privacy's sake. We talked a little bit about their son's recently-completed mission to Nagoya, Japan, which is the same mission in which I served. I told her about how I'm uploading my missionary journal to the 'net via my weblog, and she asked me if I'm scanning it in. I replied that I'm typing it in manually, interspersing retrospective commentary as I go. She said, "You must be a fast typist." Little did she know how long it's taking me and that I'm nowhere near finished.

I didn't get to chat much with DCP himself, other than him saying that he still remembers that he needs to return the book he borrowed from me about two and a half years ago. :-)

In sum, a good time was had by all. Wish y'all could've been there!

.

So apparently FAIR, or at least their conferences, are rather well recognized among the faithful--or, at least those faithful enough to attend a presentation like this.

I think it quite likely that there is a bit of a selection bias at work here.

I am sure Dr. Peterson gave a good presentation as he is apt to do.

However, I am left to wonder. The Mormon faith and BYU in general has a reputation for being able to crank out many PhDs. There are a large number of Mormon scientists in all disciplines. Can they not find one PhD with a field related to genetics to carry the banner on the LDS position? Why can't the get an LDS geneticist to explain why genetics is an unreliable science? Surely there are a couple on campus at BYU.

Dr. Shades wrote:An Evening With Daniel C. Peterson

...

M. Gerald Bradford, executive director of the Maxwell Institute. He gave the opening prayer.

...

An "opening prayer"? Geesh, that seems a bit pious for a bookstore presentation.

Rollo Tomasi wrote:

Dr. Shades wrote:An Evening With Daniel C. Peterson

...

M. Gerald Bradford, executive director of the Maxwell Institute. He gave the opening prayer.

...

An "opening prayer"? Geesh, that seems a bit pious for a bookstore presentation.

Perhaps it was necessary to bless the red punch and store bought sugar cookies..

TAK wrote:Perhaps it was necessary to bless the red punch and store bought sugar cookies..

I always laugh when saints ask God to "bless" the refreshments, because we all know there ain't no way God's going to "bless" junk food to become healthy for us. ;)

rollo: agreed.


Shades, thanks for taking the time to type this up.

Dr. Shades wrote:INTRODUCTION:

• He anticipated many people's question by asking it on their behalf: "Why am I giving this lecture?" He answered, "Because I was asked." He also indicated that he was probably the natural choice to present this lecture because "DNA" is an anagram of "Dan." :-)

So, is it fair to conclude that Daniel knows he is unqualified to give this presentation and that he was the likely candidate because:

1. he lives nearby,
2. he edited the book,
3. he's a big name apologist who would draw people to the site, even though it's not his area of expertise?

THEMES:

[*]With that in mind, it's vastly more difficult to trace genetic lines back to a specific family that lived many centuries earlier than that, especially A) due to the fact that we know nothing about Ishmael's wife, and B) due to the Native Americans' genetic bottleneck that occurred post-1492.[/list]

So... he's trying to tie Iceland to the Nephites? Wow. That's seems like a stretch to me. Did he explain the genetic bottleneck post-1492?

OTHER ITEMS:

• Throughout the presentation, DCP quoted several things that online critics have said vis-a-vis this issue.

Did he cite them properly? (there seemed to be a problem with his cites the last time he referred to online critics' ideas)

Unlike during the John Gee presentation, there was no formal Question and Answer session afterward.

Hmmmm.

Would you say this presentation was an adequate way to get the apologetic message out to the maximum amount of people?

Was the audience generally pro-LDS? In other words, was he preaching to the choir, in that some of these attendees at least knew he was part of FAIR?

• Rommelator, whom I already mentioned. After we discussed his recording and when/where it would be online, he referred to the fact that I had already greeted him by his online name and then asked if I had an online name myself. He was somewhat surprised when I said "Dr. Shades." Later he asked if the thread here about him went anywhere past the first couple of pages, 'cause he quit reading after that, and I mistakenly told him it hadn't. Now that I've checked again, I see that it went to five pages. OOPS!

Perhaps he thought you would have horns and a tail, since you consort daily with the demons here.

Brant Gardner.

No comment from or about Brant?

M. Gerald Bradford, executive director of the Maxwell Institute. He gave the opening prayer.

OP. Why am I not surprised?

George L. Mitton, one of the editors of the FARMS Review and occasional author therein.

Did you speak with him?

Louis Midgley. As he approached, Rommelator introduced me to him. He said, "This is Dr. Shades!" Dr. Midgley said, "You don't remember me, but we've met." I said, "Oh yeah, I remember." We were referring to a brief e-mail exchange we had several years ago, back even before ZLMB came into its own. At any rate, around the snack table, I made small talk by asking how New Zealand was, since he had a stint there as its CES Director. We talked quite a bit about its geography and weather.

So... he didn't tear your skin off about Chapel/Internet Mormons? Perhaps his reputation is undeserved.

Richard Lloyd Anderson, author of "Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses, a book that DCP has enthusiastically recommended several times over the years. I'm telling you, a kinder, warmer, friendlier, and nicer man you couldn't possibly meet. After I told him my name, he asked me for my last name, what I do for a living, where I work, etc. (Professor Midgley got to hear all this, too!) He made the effort, repeatedly, to ensure that he correctly remembered my name, even after I made it clear him that I'm nobody of any consequence. Our brief interaction may not qualify me to make this observation, but if it's possible to "radiate Christlike-ness," then he did it. Of course, he didn't know that I was "Dr. Shades," though :-)

Why didn't you tell him?

DCP's wife, name withheld for privacy's sake. We talked a little bit about their son's recently-completed mission to Nagoya, Japan, which is the same mission in which I served. I told her about how I'm uploading my missionary journal to the 'net via my weblog, and she asked me if I'm scanning it in. I replied that I'm typing it in manually, interspersing retrospective commentary as I go. She said, "You must be a fast typist." Little did she know how long it's taking me and that I'm nowhere near finished.

So she's not a myth. How nice.

I didn't get to chat much with DCP himself, other than him saying that he still remembers that he needs to return the book he borrowed from me about two and a half years ago. :-)

In sum, a good time was had by all. Wish y'all could've been there!

.

Well, he was the rock star there, so you would have to be content to just be one of the groupies.

Dr. Shades wrote:[*]Richard Lloyd Anderson, author of "Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses, a book that DCP has enthusiastically recommended several times over the years. I'm telling you, a kinder, warmer, friendlier, and nicer man you couldn't possibly meet. After I told him my name, he asked me for my last name, what I do for a living, where I work, etc. (Professor Midgley got to hear all this, too!) He made the effort, repeatedly, to ensure that he correctly remembered my name, even after I made it clear him that I'm nobody of any consequence. Our brief interaction may not qualify me to make this observation, but if it's possible to "radiate Christlike-ness," then he did it.

That's an absolutely apt characterization of Richard Anderson.

Besides which, he's among the finest scholars Mormondom has produced.

I again recommend his book Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses, along with his other articles on that and other topics.

John Larsen wrote:I am sure Dr. Peterson gave a good presentation as he is apt to do.

However, I am left to wonder. The Mormon faith and BYU in general has a reputation for being able to crank out many PhDs. There are a large number of Mormon scientists in all disciplines. Can they not find one PhD with a field related to genetics to carry the banner on the LDS position?

(I actually had a laugh about this oft-repeated but wholly baseless objection just last night.)

The book about which I was speaking at the bookstore -- and which I edited, which is why the bookstore invited me to talk about it -- is entitled The Book of Mormon and DNA Research and contains several articles by Ph.D.-holding LDS geneticists.

John Larsen wrote:Why can't the get an LDS geneticist to explain why genetics is an unreliable science? Surely there are a couple on campus at BYU.

Who wants to argue that "genetics is an unreliable science"?

Not me.

And certainly not the geneticists in the book.

Daniel Peterson wrote:(I actually had a laugh about this oft-repeated but wholly baseless objection just last night.)

The book about which I was speaking at the bookstore -- and which I edited, which is why the bookstore invited me to talk about it -- is entitled The Book of Mormon and DNA Research and contains several articles by Ph.D.-holding LDS geneticists.

Do you know if they asked any of the actual authors of the book to speak?