DiscussMormonism.com

It has been a long time since I've heard from this particular informant, but after a recent exchange, it seems clear that it's time to examine the latest bit of "intel." Unlike some of the last "dispatches" from this informant, the material I've been able to glean this time around is very vague. Whereas in the past this "informant" had some clear insight into the motivations underlying certain allegations, this current bit of intel is clouded in mystery. As always, I urge caution and skepticism here.

What I have learned is that (allegedly) sometime earlier this year, a very "fishy" meeting took place at the Maxwell Institute offices. As my "source" put it, "some tall 40ish guy with long hair came into the MI offices and was very quickly hustled into a conference room." Following this stranger into the conference room were Paul Hoskisson, DCP, Louis Midgley, and, most intriguingly, Ugo Perego and one of Hugh Nibley's sons. These individuals apparently stayed in the conference room for quite some time.

There is little else I can say here without jeopardizing my source, but one cannot help but speculate why these six people would have been meeting under these apparently sketchy circumstances. Most intriguing to me is the presence among them of Ugo Perego, who, I've since learned, was allegedly hired by FARMS to perform a paternity test of some kind. (Whether this is simply his testing on Joseph Smith's alleged heirs, or something else---perhaps related to Hugh Nibley---is unclear.)

So, what is going on here? If my source is correct, these people are apparently trying to guard some secret. What might that be, though? This was the answer I was given:

Agent X wrote:[someone at FARMS said] that Perego, or his company, had been paid to conduct a paternity test of some kind. Beyond that, no one would talk about the thing at all.

Very, very strange. Has Perego at last located offspring from Joseph Smith's plural marriages? And if so, why was one of Nibley's sons present at the meeting? And who was the "40ish, long-haired" guy?

It's all very mysterious, and I don't know what to make of it, but I thought it would be worthwhile to share this latest bit, with all the usual caveats, of course.

This is pretty bizarre. Regarding Nibley's son, does the Nibley family derive, in part, through any of Joseph's plural wives? You know, from one of the ones who had a legal husband at the time she was "married" to Smith?

Regarding the long-haired guy, yeah, if Ugo Perego is involved, chances are this guy is a descendant of Smith through one of his plural wives. After Ugo told him of this fact, perhaps FARMS hustled them all in to ask them to keep quiet about it.

Now, if my random speculation about a Nibley ancestor is true, maybe--and this is an EXTREMELY WILD GUESS here--could the Nibley kid and the long-haired guy be carrying the same genetic markers, hence the need for them both to be in the same meeting? (But it makes you wonder about the "paternity test"--how on earth are they supposed to do that? Dig up Joseph's body?)

I'm sure we'll never know. Of course, the long hair pretty much pegs the mystery guest as a FARMS outsider, which makes you wonder why he would merit a closed-door meeting to begin with.

I hope Agent X sees fit to fill you in on more details.

DCP is going to read this and I only want to know one thing from him: is he or anyone else associated with MI aware of any evidence discovered in the past 10 years that supports the conclusion that Joseph Smith fathered a child with someone other than Emma? Very simply question.

Dr. Shades wrote:This is pretty bizarre. Regarding Nibley's son, does the Nibley family derive, in part, through any of Joseph's plural wives? You know, from one of the ones who had a legal husband at the time she was "married" to Smith?

I don't know, Dr. Shades. That's a good question.

Regarding the long-haired guy, yeah, if Ugo Perego is involved, chances are this guy is a descendant of Smith through one of his plural wives. After Ugo told him of this fact, perhaps FARMS hustled them all in to ask them to keep quiet about it.

Yeah, the presence of of Perego is definitely intriguing. And, my "source" says that he "was paid" to conduct this test. Paid by whom? My understand is that it was FARMS/the MI that was paying Perego, but I could be wrong about that. Basically, I'm just going off your speculation here, Shades. Hopefully I'm not going too far afield in saying that you suspect that FARMS might be engaged in a cover-up of some kind?

Now, if my random speculation about a Nibley ancestor is true, maybe--and this is an EXTREMELY WILD GUESS here--could the Nibley kid and the long-haired guy be carrying the same genetic markers, hence the need for them both to be in the same meeting? (But it makes you wonder about the "paternity test"--how on earth are they supposed to do that? Dig up Joseph's body?)

Huh. Yeah, I don't know. If we were to learn the identity of the "long-haired guy," I bet it would explain a lot.

I'm sure we'll never know. Of course, the long hair pretty much pegs the mystery guest as a FARMS outsider, which makes you wonder why he would merit a closed-door meeting to begin with.

Another good point. If, as you suggest, FARMS is trying to "cover up" something.... Might it involve keeping this guy quiet?

dblagent007 wrote:DCP is going to read this and I only want to know one thing from him: is he or anyone else associated with MI aware of any evidence discovered in the past 10 years that supports the conclusion that Joseph Smith fathered a child with someone other than Emma? Very simply question.

That a great question, dblagent. Here's an interesting, follow-up, "thought experiment" question: If the MI knew about additional Joseph Smith children, would they publish their findings? Or would they try to cover it up?

Was the "40ish, long-haired" guy carrying an ancient Egyptian amulet or any other paraphernalia from that time period? Could Hugh Nibley have been a descendant of Joseph Smith or someone else?

Is there any speculation that Drs. Peterson and Midgley were there to help devise a credible cover story - one that could fool those of us at Mormon Discussions who have a keen eye for intrigue?

Doctor Scratch wrote:Yeah, the presence of of Perego is definitely intriguing. And, my "source" says that he "was paid" to conduct this test. Paid by whom? My understand is that it was FARMS/the MI that was paying Perego, but I could be wrong about that. Basically, I'm just going off your speculation here, Shades.

Hold on a second. . . upon further thought, it looks like I was wrong about something: Why would the long-haired guy be escorted into a closed-door meeting unless he was already determined to be a Smith descendant, which would mean that Perego would have already completed such "paternity testing" in advance? It makes no sense that he would be paid to conduct a second test. There's obviously something else afoot here. . . unless, like I said, they're trying to figure out who else from the same female ancestor might be a descendant of Smith (as opposed to her legal, legitimate husband). I didn't think any Nibley children were closely associated with FARMS, hence the speculation about common Smith ancestry. Of course, if the Nibley clan DON'T trace ancestry from such a plural wife, then that makes the notion of a "paternity test" all the more bizarre.

Hopefully I'm not going too far afield in saying that you suspect that FARMS might be engaged in a cover-up of some kind?

If everyone in the meeting was as tight-lipped about it as the informant declares, then there clearly is something being covered up. Of course, it could be something as benign as the future direction of Mopologetics, so we perhaps ought not to place too much stock in that one detail alone.

Huh. Yeah, I don't know. If we were to learn the identity of the "long-haired guy," I bet it would explain a lot.

No doubt.

If, as you suggest, FARMS is trying to "cover up" something.... Might it involve keeping this guy quiet?

Anything's possible. Of course, it might be something routine, like sending the guy on a research trip to make copies of something in some archive somewhere. On the other hand, maybe HE wants FARMS to keep quiet about something. Maybe he's about to publish an anti-Mormon book and want to buy his way out of getting a "review."

But of course, neither scenario would involve either Ugo Perego or paternity testing. So, once again, we're back to wild speculation.

Dr. Scratch wrote:If the MI knew about additional Joseph Smith children, would they publish their findings? Or would they try to cover it up?

Maybe this will answer your question: When it comes to suspected offspring of Joseph who have been disproven to be his spawn, they trumpeted the results to the four winds, did they not? But what about the other suspected offspring on that list? Still no hint of a trace of a peep, even all these years later.

The deafening silence tells me all I need to know.

Dr. Shades wrote: Of course, if the Nibley clan DON'T trace ancestry from such a plural wife, then that makes the notion of a "paternity test" all the more bizarre.

You do know that paternity does not really require a polygamous marriage, right? Might be the action of a rogue angel or someone else.

Doctor Scratch wrote: Or would they try to cover it up?

Oh please. That's one of those "duh!" statements.

moksha wrote:You do know that paternity does not really require a polygamous marriage, right?

Good point. Maybe this guy is a descendant of one of Joseph's underaged "brides."

The problem is, if she wasn't married to anyone else, then it would've been obvious from the moment of the child's birth--early 1845 or beforehand--that the child was the spawn of Joseph. There wouldn't need to be any "paternity testing," either by Ugo or anyone else.