I swear a casual observer might conclude that some devious exmormons created crocket and droopy as “TBM sockpuppets” in order to make defenders of the faith look bad. There have been times, in the past, I suspected the same, but reality is that these two really are defenders of the faith, and they present themselves accurately here.
I have to say first that it’s amusing to watch droopy back crocket up, over and over, on this board. Droopy thinks that Mormons can’t be faithful believers and be democrats, and has pontificated about that ad nauseum on this board. Crocket makes no bones about being a democrat. So we can imagine how droopy must be holding his nose in order to defend him. LOL!
If droopy has actually read any material about ancient Mesoamerica written by real scholars and not the lunatic fringe (like Barry Fell), then he has done so with the same comprehension he applied to this thread – which is none whatsoever. I have a hard time believing he’s actually read the thread. It seems more likely he’s very quickly skimmed threads and only paid attention to isolated sentences to which he chose to respond. I am being generous by saying that is the likely case, because otherwise, if he actually did read all the posts and genuinely tried to comprehend them, his case is tragic.
Here’s one example:
droopy
Other's have done that for me, so I have no need to spend lot's of time better spent in education and study then arguing with a half educated polemicist.
You are quite capable of doing your own homework on the diffusionist movement and its best proponents. I have a suspicion, however, that your corpus of "reliable sources" will be selected so as to - conveniently - relegate everything and everyone you disagree with to the "lunatic fringe".
I'm not going to waste my time playing your game. If you've already relegated the eminent Gordon to the fringe, and this demonstrates little competence to critique the diffunsionist movement from the outset, or approach it with an open mind.
It doesn't matter who was here to you Beastie: Jews, Black Africans, Chinese, Romans, Greeks, Celts, whatever. The real point is if its plausible, or even likely, that some old world peoples made their way here, then its plausible that others did, including - yes, that's right, Lehi and his party.
And that's what you must absolutely and inexorably avoid, at whatever intellectual cost.
Now, going by this response, one would conclude that my argument was generic anti-diffusionism. And yet, on the page immediately preceding droopy’s reply, I posted this lengthy excerpt from Michael Coe:
From The Maya
Michael Coe
Sixth Edition
1999
page 57
There have been a number of contradictory theories to account for the rise of Maya civilization. One of the most persistent holds that the previously undistinguished Maya came under the influence of travelers from shores as distant as the China coast; as a matter of interest to the lay public, it should be categorically emphasized that no objects manufactured in any part of the Old World have been identified in any Maya site, and that ever since the days of Stephens and Catherwood few theories involving trans-Pacific or trans-Atlantic contact have survived scientific scrutiny.
The possibility of some trans-Pacific influence on Mesoamerican cultures cannot, however, be so easily dismissed. Its most consistent proponent has been David Kelley of the University of Calgary, who has long pointed out that within the twenty named days of the 260-day calendar so fundamental to Mesoamericans is a sequence of animals that can be matched in similar sequence within the lunar zodiacs of many East and Southeast-Asian civilizations. To Kelly, this resemblance is far too close to be merely coincidental. Furthermore, Asian and Mesoamerican cosmological systems, which emphasize a quadripartite universe of four cardinal points associated with specific colors, plants, animals, and even gods, are amazingly similar. Both Asian and Mesoamerican religions see a rabbit on the face of the full moon (whereas we see a “Man in the Moon”), and they also associate this luminary with a woman weaving a loom.
Even more extraordinary, as the historian of science the late Joseph Needham reminded us, Chinese astronomers of the Han Dynasty as well as the ancient Maya used exactly the same complex calculations to give warning about the likelihood of lunar and solar eclipses. These data would suggest (but by no means prove) that there was direct contact across the Pacific. As oriental seafaring was always on a far higher technological plane than anything ever known in the prehispanic New World, it is possible that Asian intellectuals may have established some sort of contact with their Mesoamerican counterparts by the end of the Preclassic.
Lest this be thought to be idle speculation along the lines of the lunatic fringe books so common in this field, let me point out one further piece of evidence. Paul Tolstoy of the University of Montreal has made a meticulous study of the occurrence of the techniques and tools utilized in the manufacture of bark paper around the Pacific basin. It is his well-founded conclusion that this technology, known in ancient China, Southeast Asia and Indonesia, as well as in Mesoamerica, was diffused from eastern Indonesia to Mesoamerica, at a very early date. The main use of such paper in Mesoamerica was in the production of screenfold books to record ritual calendrical, and astronomical information. It is not unreasonable to suppose that it was through the medium of such books, which are still in use by Indoneisan people like the Batak, that an intellectual exchange took place.
This does not mean that the Maya – or any other Mesoamerican civilization – were merely derivative from Old World prototypes. What it does suggest is that at a few times in their early history, the Maya may have been receptive to some important ideas originating in the Eastern Hemisphere.
Can ya read this, droopy? Are you able to understand the words? If I’m just generically anti-diffusionist, why would I offer this reference from the most highly respected authority on the Maya that actually states there is serious evidence that real scholars take seriously as far as contact between the far east and Mesoamerica?
My argument has nothing to do with generic anti-diffusionism. My argument is clear and simple: there is no evidence of contact between ancient Israel and ancient Mesoamerica. This idea has been thoroughly debunked by modern experts in the field. Yes, it was a very popular idea during Joseph Smith’ time period. When the magnificent ruins in Central America began to be uncovered, people just could not believe that the ancestors of the native “savages” could ever have been responsible for such a civilization. It had to be ancestors of
their own culture and ideology who were capable of building such a civilization.
Gordon is only unusual in that he openly adhered to this racist and bigoted idea long past the time when most sensible people dropped it. You see it clearly in the sections of his book I quoted – a book, by the way, which I own and have read.
Gordon:
The testimony of ancient American sculpture is complex but clear to this extent: Long before the Vikings reached America around AD 1000, Mesoamerica had long been the scene of the intermingling of different populations from across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Some of the most creative people in America came from the Near East; but no one group monopolized the scene. Caucasians from one end of Europe and Japanese types, from the Far East; from the Mediterranean at different times came various Semites including Phoenicians and Carthaginians, as well as Egyptians, Greeks, Etruscans, Romans and still others. In general, the main consequence was the mingling of highly civilized people from all over the world, creating on American soil, through the pooling of their cultural resources, a galaxy of brilliant old American civilizations, whose final phases are known to us as Inca, Maya, and Aztec. In culture, as in the physical universe, out of nothing comes nothing. The breathtaking achievements of the Mesoamericans could not be, and were not, the works of savages who lifted themselves up by their bootstraps. Instead they are the culminations of mingled strands of civilization brought to these shores by a variety of talented people from Europe, Africa, and Asia. (p 30)
Another piece of evidence that either droopy never even read this entire thread, or read sloppily, is that he referenced Quinn as my “primary source”. What the heck???? I can’t think of many other statements that are as out in left field as this one. Obviously I haven’t referred to Quinn at all on this thread, because he has nothing to do with this topic. Quinn believes in the Book of Mormon, just like he believes in the restoration and in a living prophet. Second, outside this thread, I haven’t quoted extensively from Quinn or relied on his works, not that there’s anything wrong with doing so, but my primary criticism and interest in Mormonism usually doesn’t coincide with his works. Apparently, this is just some generic – and stupid – insult that droopy likes to lob against critics.
Third, droopy says “what hoaxes and frauds” after I provided evidence of
three hoaxes or frauds that Gordon relies on. For heaven’s sake, in responding after the first one, crocket admitted that the piece in question was a fraud.
Droopy is really very poorly educated on this subject. I venture to guess that he hasn’t even read the arguments of Brant Gardner, who is the most qualified apologist dealing with the subject (other than John Clark, who has dealt with it only briefly). Brant wouldn’t uses sources with obvious frauds and hoaxes therein, and neither would Clark. They would be embarrassed by both crocket and droopy, and would probably rush to assure readers that neither represents the actual state of Book of Mormon apologetics.