A Very Limited Geography

[_CaliforniaKid]

Are we really to believe that scientists have a good idea of the DNA from east Asia but not from the middle east.

If FARMS really wants to know what Hebrew DNA looks like, all they have to do is test the priesthood holders of the Church. According to Joseph Smith, those who faithfully seek the priesthood have their old blood completely purged out and replaced with the literal blood of Abraham.

[_selek]

Until the final returns are in, no one is in a position to make final pronouncements, and as long as science continues to progress, the final returns will remain at the other end of a future of wonders and surprises. In the world of things, we must forever keep an open mind, because we simply don’t know the answers. But we are not claiming that because science does not have the ultimate answers, religion does have them. What we do claim is that the words of the prophets cannot be held to the tentative and defective tests that men have devised for them. Science, philosophy, and common sense all have a right to their day in court. But the last word does not lie with them. Every time men in their wisdom have come forth with the last word, other words have promptly followed. The last word is a testimony of the gospel that comes only by direct revelation. Our Father in heaven speaks it, and if it were in perfect agreement with the science of today, it would surely be out of line with the science of tomorrow. Let us not, therefore, seek to hold God to the learned opinions of the moment when he speaks the language of eternity.

Simon Belmont,

I highly recommend you watch this, apply it to the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham, then repost.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU

[_Themis]

Semitic?

Corrected it. :)

Anyhow, that would assume that they intermixed instead of mostly sticking together through inbreeding (more incestuous than European royalty was).

Well that is the main apologetic. The Book of Mormon does not suggest that any other groups were in America other then the two that came from Jerusalem, but then we understand that they could never have grown to the numbers the Book of Mormon tells us in the time listed. I doubt Joseph or others would have understood this. You are right that these two groups have a culture that would discourage it, which in reality would be impossible.

One might assume, given certain passages in the Book of Mormon that there are plenty of literal offspring even today. However, it is possible that the Book of Mormon speaks to adopted descendants instead of literal flesh and blood descendants.

Adopted is just a made up apologetic that has no merit. If the text could be shown to clearly indicate this then I would take it seriously. As to literal offspring we see no DNA evidence to support this. Unfortunately the Book of Mormon really does not support what we find in reality. It should if true, but when you look at all the evidence regarding Joseph Smith and his religion we see a much clearer picture of a 19th century made up religion. Same with L Ron Hubbard, but I am sure many of them would disagree, and they have a fairly robust apologetics going on as well.

That was a close one, but the dragon remains unfalsifiable.

That is one of the main purposes of apologia. To bad their is way to much evidence around, but I did like that analogy from the dude.

[_keithb]

Here's a little something to chew on Sock Puppet and Kishkumen,

The reason we can’t “identify” Nephite sites is because we lack sufficient texts giving the ancient pronunciation of proper names to allow us to do so. How can we possibly be expected to determine if a particular site is or is not Zarahemla if we do not know the ancient name of that site? It boggles the mind that Anti-Mormons are so thick-headed that they can’t seen this patently obvious fact

Indeed, each one of these sentences is spot on. Your sarcastic analogy Kishkumen, and don't think I expected more from you, was flawed. In your analogy, you neglected to posit volumes upon volumes of empirical research published by those with a vested interest in uncovering the existence of your "galaxy travelers" and failing. Absent this, you would not have proof positive that the travelers "really did" abandon their "sophisticated technology". For instance, suppose a researcher uncovered a piece of technology left behind by the "galaxy travelers"? This would imply that they did not give up the technology as you said and thus falsifying the hypothesis. Likewise, if we were to discover a "NHM" inscribed on a city wall, and this indeed identified "Nahom" as a city, then the Book of Mormon would be falsified at once, given what the Book of Mormon claims for itself regarding its limited scope and the destruction of its civilization and culture as predicted.

Getting that uncomfortable feeling yet?

The "NHM discovery" is perhaps the biggest piece of so what evidence for the Book of Mormon out there. Statistically speaking, there are enough names in the Book of Mormon and places in Arabia that Joseph Smith was bound to get one right (and possibly more) just by sheer luck.

[_Themis]

If FARMS really wants to know what Hebrew DNA looks like, all they have to do is test the priesthood holders of the Church. According to Joseph Smith, those who faithfully seek the priesthood have their old blood completely purged out and replaced with the literal blood of Abraham.

Maybe that is what happened to the Lemba people since it was only found in some of the males. :)

[_Roger]

Okay Simon (S):

I apologize if I come across as dogmatic. Molecular biologists are accused of this quite often, but the evidence they are dealing with is extremely compelling and far less ambiguous that the evidence archaeologists have to deal with. One of the most exciting fields that is emerging now is molecular archaeology. Detailed analysis of many ancient DNA samples. This is where the next big breakthroughs are going to come if the two camps can get along with each other.

I realize this isn't anywhere near on-topic, but I'm curious.... what are the chances that science could reproduce extinct species like the plot to Jurassic Park? I've heard talk of bringing back the Mammoth by using elephant DNA... is such a thing possible?

All the best.

On second thought this post is still within the realm of "on-topic" as it leaves the door wide open for Kish to insert a Curelom joke.

[_Simon Southerton]

Simon, how many generations would it take to wipe out a DNA identity?

Its pretty hard to completely erase signs of a populations DNA. An individual yes, but not a population. Lets say a small population of 500 drongos (Oz slang for dope) mixed with a large adjacent population of say 100,000 hippies (apologies to any hippies) the odds of picking up the drongos mtDNA would be related to the different sizes of the two groups (500/100,000 = one in 200). So if you tested 1000 hippos (hybrids) you would stand a good chance of detecting the mtDNA of a drongo. Test 10,000 and your odds would be extremely high of picking up a drongo.

Using the latest methods for testing the nuclear DNA you would always be able to detect drongo DNA. This is because you can examine tens of thousands of DNA markers in nuclear DNA. It is almost impossible for the nuclear DNA to go extinct. Mitochondrial DNA is only passed continuously down maternal lines. Y chromosome DNA is only passed down paternal lines. Nuclear DNA is passed down both lines and can be passed much more rapidly between adjacent populations.

Of course all this is not really relevant to the Book of Mormon narrative as the book tells us precisely nothing about any non-Hebrew groups living nearby. All of the adjacent populations in the Book of Mormon came from the Middle East.

[_Simon Southerton]

Okay Simon (S):

I apologize if I come across as dogmatic. Molecular biologists are accused of this quite often, but the evidence they are dealing with is extremely compelling and far less ambiguous that the evidence archaeologists have to deal with. One of the most exciting fields that is emerging now is molecular archaeology. Detailed analysis of many ancient DNA samples. This is where the next big breakthroughs are going to come if the two camps can get along with each other.

I realize this isn't anywhere near on-topic, but I'm curious.... what are the chances that science could reproduce extinct species like the plot to Jurassic Park? I've heard talk of bringing back the Mammoth by using elephant DNA... is such a thing possible?

All the best.

On second thought this post is still within the realm of "on-topic" as it leaves the door wide open for Kish to insert a Curelom joke.

I think there is a genuine chance of success with the Mammoth. As I understand it they are searching the Mammoth genome now to find what they think are the critical mutations responsible for Mammothness. They then plan to modify an existing elephant embryo 's DNA so that it contains these mammoth mutations. Its not a small job but with the rate of advances in the technology, it is hard to rule it out.

I think attempts to generate Cureloms are almost certain to succeed. I mean it would be impossible to prove that you haven't generated a Curelom so it therefore must be a true Curelom.

[Guest]

No doubt smug with self-deluded confidence, Kish wrote:

I think it is telling that critics are unable to address my LST (Limited Stature Theory) of virtual Lamanite invisibility in the archaeological record.

I have it on good authority that your LILLIPUTIAN LST falls so far SHORT of acceptable MACROSCOPIC LDS apologia that the mere mention of it brings howls of laughter from the true defenders of LDS archeology. They recognize that it's not so much that the critics are unable to address it as that it fails to LIVE UP to it's PRODIGIOUS billing. Sure it may be FULL of MONOLITHIC ideas but it suffers BIG-TIME from reaching it's FULL potential by postulating such PICAYUNE inutile drivel as the notion that Limited Stature artifacts would be mistaken for GI Joe paraphernalia. And what of Limited Stature Cureloms? Or Limited Stature synagogues? Your LITTLE theory can't even begin to address these GARGANTUAN questions. It's answers are MINUSCULE in comparison to the MASSIVE problems it's acceptance would create. Face it, it just doesn't MEASURE UP.

Have a nice day.

PS.... after rethinking.... you may be on to something here, Kish. Limited stature means limited hill altitude which means Cumorah might have been little more than an ant hill. Following that train of logic, it is not inconceivable that Cumorah itself no longer exists due to dismantlement by ants. Bones, chariots, spears, swords, Cureloms, the whole nine yards, likely now occupy space in some subterranean ant farm. I stand corrected.

[_Inconceivable]

Of course all this is not really relevant to the Book of Mormon narrative as the book tells us precisely nothing about any non-Hebrew groups living nearby. All of the adjacent populations in the Book of Mormon came from the Middle East.

As I believe I mentioned in another thread, Hebrews and Mormons don't get along with those unchosen that cumber the land they think God has given them.

Hebrews are generally commanded by their God to exterminate the heathen. On the flipside, when the Hebrews and Mormons are a minority they are run off and hunted down.

It is improbable that Lehites as a subculture blended into another. Besides, historically, their God would prefer a prophet have an incestuous moment with his daughters (Lot) than mingle with the unclean. Booze is way ok in this instance as well. Somebody was drunk anyways.

Rodney King's inspiring words fall on deaf ears at least to those that consider themselves chosen of God.