And GZ continues a disrespectful attitude that makes him look bad... LOL!
DU And this was available to a backwoods boy in the 1820s? . . . . Farm boys in America the 1820's did not get to learn much about the interior of Arabia, even if they had wanted to, and had the time to study.
GZ Did a little more research. There are at least 10 maps of Arabia that would have been available to Smith or his inner circle of Rigdon, Crowdrey, Harris, and others. Seven of which have references to the area:
Niebuhr 1771 – A tribal area listed as Nehhm
Plinkerton 1813 Atlas – A tribal area listed as Nehem
Anville, 1794 atlas – A tribal area listed as Nehem
Bonne – 1785 atlas - A tribal area listed as Nagiah
Cary, 1804 atlas – Tribal area listed as Nehem
Clouet, 1787 De l’Arabie – area identified as Nagiah
Darton 1812 world atlas – tribal area listed as Nehem Haulan
I never said there were not maps, I stated they would not have been available to a teenager on a frontier farming community in New york in the early 1800s
GZ These all differ from the mormon insisted name of nahom and are tribal regions, not specific locations. Thus there are plenty of opportunities for Smith and his inner circle to have had access to one of these maps.
So, let me get your logic straight, the maps existed (in Boston, or London, or somewhere) and that proves Joseph smith had access to them, but the existence of other DNA in Lehi's party, and other parties they joined with means none of that DNA survived...
Have you ever taken a class in logical theory? I don't know what it takes to be a Geologist, but as a programmer, I have had classes in logic, and in methodology, and in statistical theory. For the record, these classes were "easy" for me and I Got A's
Can you show that a) Joseph actually had access (were they in a local library like 10 miles or less, as he would have been walking) and b) that he would have been able to read them (he had a third grade education, remember?)
DU Listen your self, it's right at 2:03 into the Video . . .
GZ The native pronounces is Nihm DU.
There are none so deaf... Lurkers, you (as always) be the judge.
GZ Surpisingly close to the tribal area name Nehem and agrees with Vogel’s investigation (Vogel, Dan, 2004, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet). The Yemen archaeologist pronounces it Nehhem. Again, this agrees with maps of the region. IN hebrew, the consonants "NHM" are pronounced as written, it should be pronounced with the H as hard, not soft (this is what we find in the hebrew "nahom" to be sorry"). So the sound would be like "ch" as in Scottish "loch" and we should expect to read of a bom placename of "Nachom, not "Nahom." The Book of Mormon placename doesn't fit the Hebrew word "to be sorry". However, as the video goes, the meaning shifts from “consolation” (hebrew) to “stone cutting” -
Some times words mean many things based on context. Many middle eastern languages are like this, as well as Asian ones.
You keep asking for people with degrees, and "specialists" The Guys on the tape are all specialists, why do you a geologist have a specialty in middle eastern languages and why should we trust you over them? (this seesm to be inconsistent behavior on your part)
Quoted The South Arabian root NHM has to do with stone cutting whereas the Hebrew root has to do with consolation. See Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968), 636—37; and Joan Copeland Biella, Dictionary of Old South Arabic: Sabaean Dialect, Harvard Semitic Series No. 25 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1982), 296.
GZ So mormons interprete the word to mean sorrow, the locals say it means stone cutting.
It's two different languages, you know, I hope that languages often reuse the same sounds (because human speech is dependent on the human mouth) and these reused sounds often mean different things.
GZ Nephi sez it was already named that word and it meant sorrow. Aparently Nephi didn’t talk to the locals or they would have given him a different story of the words pronunciation and meaning.
Or maybe he heard the locals use their name and attached the maning that came from his native langauge to the name (as an english speaker who has learned chinese, this happens and is a good way to remember words for some people)
Or maybe the locals spoke Hebrew because this was a trading route...
Or (the more likely scenario) something else (that's the problem with "Maybe" you may be right, but probably not)
GZ Once again, mormons shooting arrow, drawing circle.
Once again Godzilla shooting foot then pointing at target... (It's two different languages...)
<--Snip-->
GZ Probably you – as you have done in the past in great abundance. But you missed a UFO website to support your claims.
That's OK, I'm sure you'll keep me informed, you seem to be cruzing them a lot.
<--Snip-->
GZ Then you had better deal honestly with your science DUh. The video does not use the words rain forest at all. The term tropical monsoon forest and yes, tropical vegitation is used as well. Real rainforests receive 80+ inches of precipitation per year.
Just like an anti, there's Forrest, and Rain, do you have anything to add? You were saying there was nothing to make a ship out of, I was talking about the trees... GZ If one looks at the video, what is readily apparent are the lack of significant trees, trees large enough in size to permit the construction of boats large enough to sail the Indian and Pacific Oceans.
Isa. 2: 13
13 And upon all the cedars of Lebanon, that are high and lifted up, and upon all the oaks of Bashan,Best imitation of Godzilla's Voice:
I saw a video shot in Lebanon once There were no Cedars int he vido that I saw therefore the Bible is false...
Is this what really passes for Logic with you Godzilla?
<--Snip-->
DU Well, there's one out behind my house, it's a big orange streak on the mountain... How much Iron do you need to make tools to cut down trees and shape the wood?
GZ LOL, wow, a big orange streak on a mountain = an iron ore deposit. ROTFLAICGU, did the little green men tell you that?
Actually, no, but people who have been up there said that it was iron and I think sulfur, anyway, that's what they said, me I just know what I heard.
GZ Nephi brought no tools, so how is he going to 1) dig the ore if he could find it and 2) work the product before, during and after smelting – use his bare hands?
Moses Brought no damns with him, so how is he going to part thred sea?</GodzillaLogic>
And you go camping without tools? You travel for over a year without digging a latrine or a well, or anything (shovels of some kind?) IF you can't make tools without ore to mine ore, how exactly did ore ever get mined in the first place?
DU Um, I'm not a Geologist, but doesn't that depend on how much Iron you are looking for? Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can get iron from dirt if you want to work hard enough.
GZ Fair enough, take your average dirt; you’d probably need a hundred tons (or more) of dirt to extract a pound of iron (small axe head). Get the picture. So, he had to work hard, besides, remember, God was involved and with the Lord all things are possible. 1 Ne. 17:8-10
8 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto me, saying: Thou shalt construct a ship, after the manner which I shall show thee, that I may carry thy people across these waters. 9 And I said: Lord, whither shall I go that I may find ore to molten, that I may make tools to construct the ship after the manner which thou hast shown unto me? 10 And it came to pass that the Lord told me whither I should go to find ore, that I might make tools.So, Godzilla, you're a geologist, if I put you in a mountainous area, and said find enough ore (any kind copper, iron, whatever) to make an adz, an axe and a saw You get common camping gear to work with and you have say three months are you going to tell me you couldn't come up with something? Let's say a million dollars was at stake and you have a film crew following you around to make sure you don't cheat by buying something.
<--Snipping out a bunch of insults again-->
DU Now, Bountiful is small enough that Nephi could have left and gone to the desert for the ore, and he could have melted it over a charcoal fire.
GZ I’m sure the camels were happy about that. Your problem is iron melts at 2800 °F, far too hot for a charcoal fire. Why don’t you go and get enough of your orange dirt and see how successful your method is.
The Dark Ages Re-Creation Company Has a page on Iron smelting in the dark ages, they are actively recreating the smelting of Iron with Coal and a bellows like Nephi Says he made to blow the fire.
(Google again (And no, I do not know if they have ever been to a UFO convention...)
Joseph (living in the early 1800's) would have been way more familiar with Blacksmithing, and with primitive iron work, so this is not a proof that he was inspired, it's just more proof that you don't know what you are talking about. Even today, blast furnaces use Coal (Coke) to make steel, The earliest Smelting was done over Camp fires...
Here is a quote for you:
The earliest evidence to date for the bloomery smelting of iron is found at Tell Hammeh, Jordan, and dates to 930 BC (C14 dating). However, based on the archaeological record of iron artifacts, it is clear that intentional reduction of iron metal from terrestrial ores, must have started near the end of the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1600–1150 BC).(I cut out the text that went to external links, go to the source to follow them.)
As for the Camels, I'm sure shay were not the ones Smelting the ore.
GZ No, just confirms you lack of knowledge of what is claimed by the bom.
Then you quote 2 Nephi 5:15 You are quoting from after the Got to the Americas, in Bountiful, it never says Iron, it says ore and tools: 1 Ne. 17:8-10
8 And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto me, saying: Thou shalt construct a ship, after the manner which I shall show thee, that I may carry thy people across these waters. 9 And I said: Lord, whither shall I go that I may find ore to molten, that I may make tools to construct the ship after the manner which thou hast shown unto me? 10 And it came to pass that the Lord told me whither I should go to find ore, that I might make tools.See? Besides, I thought biblical Scholars all agreed that Iron was a generic term for metal that could mean Iron or any tempered metal.
DU You're the Geologist, is it possible to find metals (copper, nickel, iron, etc) in a setting like Bountiful and the surrounding mountains (Nephi said God showed him where to go in the mountains to find the ore, to Molten into tools.) 1 Nephi 17: 7-11,
GZ Oh is it? Evidence of those ores in mine able concentrations in a desert region would leave very clear remains of both the mining activity itself, as well as the ore processing and smelting. North Oman is a well known bronze age source of copper, but the area around so-called Bountiful was anything but in regards to mine able metals.
I Asked you your opinion as a gemologist, not stated a "fact" you then challenge me on my non statement, you're a funny guy.
There should be a big difference between evidence for a mine that was used for generations and a one time build a saw type need for ore.
As for the quotes about Iron in America, here Are some Archeology sites you may want to review before complaining about Iron in America...
America's Mysterious Furnaces, Native American Iron, Ancient Iron Ore Mine Discovered in Peruvian Andes, And Last Some quotes from Early American Iron Smelting:
Despite the British ban on home manufacturing, many American blacksmiths got involved in secretly locating bog iron or iron ore, and began smelting their own pig iron. All over the country, there are outcroppings of rock laden with iron ore. That's easy to find.Clearly your insistence that producing Iron requires "specialized Tools" is a reult of your opinion, not of the actuality of history.
Even where iron outcroppings do not come to the surface, people on long wooden sleds fished iron out of bogs where the chemical action of artetian water joined with surface oxygen to precipitate crude iron. Bog iron formed in irregular shaped balls that floated beneath the bog's surface.
Today we picture smelters as giant contraptions spewing sparks hundreds of feet, but in colonial America a tiny smelter could be made no bigger than some backyard barbecue pits. The fundamental design required a chimney into which fuel could be poured, holes along the side to allow air into the fire box, and spigots at the bottom which could be opened up to draw off the molten iron into pre-made pathways in sand where pigs could be formed.
DU Nephi used a bellows that he made from the skins of animals to blow on the Fire to make it hotter and he made tools to make a ship. GZ Bellows are incapable of raising the temperature to 2800 deg F DU. Claerly, the Dark Ages Re-Creation Company disagrees with you on this, and they are after all experts in recreating this kind of stuff.
DU So you re telling me that you couldn't make something? He had all the gear they had been using to travel, he wasn't starting with his bare hands.
GZ FWIW, without the right tools, he would be starting with his bare hands. That is obviously your opinion, I think I could come up with something given the time, then again, maybe I'm just more resourceful than you.
DU I have done a bit of metal work, not a lot, but it was fun, I melted ore in a ceramic dish and scraped off the dross, I have made molds out of clay and poured metal into them, I could have made an Adz and and Axe and some stuff given a little time and some ore. I'm not drowning, you are always rushing to your preconceived conclusion and trying to drag everyone with you, sorry we won't go.
GZ LOL, you melted ore in a ceramic dish LOL. It takes a lot more than that to get metal LOL. Now try it using the materials on hand at the time. Make yourself an axe DU, woops, gotta get a lot of wood in order to melt all that dirt to get the pound of potentially workable iron, woops, no axe to cut the wood with, LOL.
So while Camping and cooking on the way to Nahom, they were buying cords of wood from vendors? Don't be stupid, they already had a way to cut wood. They already had a way to Dig. They had knives and they had everything needed to dig iron out and smelt it. Don't make me quote the Dark Ages Re-Creation Company. See, you made me link to the Dark Ages Re-Creation Company again, dang, I did it again. DU Actually, I supplied three maybe that's why you butchered the preceding section, losing all the links...
GZ No, your links left some to be deserved, I tried to follow up based upon the titles highlighted.
I am so sorry my links did not meet with your approval, exactly how do i go about posting a link that proves you wrong in sucha way that you will like it? </Sarc>
I guess you just cut what you don't "like" then. It figures.
DU Kind of like the anti's on Freerepublic? when it comes to research, I get stuff from websites, you have even linked to them, LOL!
GZ It was your links I was trying to follow. Chapman is a Mormon group DUh not an anti, BTW
That was my point, Anti's pontificate, Mormons post links, Anti's try to use the links we post to prove they were right all along, and without doing any of their own research, LOL!
DU This is a particularly funny comment coming as it does about DNA studies in which the person saying he has disproved the Book of Mormon did no studies of his own, he just reinterpreted other people's data, hey, I guess it's the cheaper way to come to a preconceived conclusion.
Gz Gee, ‘ol Woodward at Sorenson Genetics Inst., a mormon, conducts the studies as part of a team utilizing the DNA data his institute has collected over the years (you must have skipped over that part) which totally refutes Crandall (who BTW, was reinterpreting someone else’s data – tsk tsk), LOL. Like you when it comes to our religion, right?
I was talking about Simon Southerton, you know, the Guy who got all this started after messing around on his wife an then reinterpeting other people's work to match his conclusions? Remember him?
DU Like you when it comes to our religion, right?
GZ I’m still waiting to be shown to be incorrect on mormon doctrine by you.
This is funny, how many htreads have we been on together? On all of them you have never admitted defeat, kind of like here the Book of Mormon clearly precludes a DNA disproof, yet you claim one anyway. My proving you wrong is not dependent on your recognition that it has happened. Denial, it's not a river in Egypt.
DU Kind of like the Guy that did his DNA research by ... Well, you know where I'm going with that. This thread is supposed to be about DNA, I know I keep bringing it back to the pesky topic, but it's funny how no matter how far afield you drag us, the arguments you bring to bear still apply to Simon Southerton, isn't it.
GZ Your memory must be slipping again, lack of O2 from drowning too much here.
I think you have that backwards, I'm the guy dong back strokes around you, you're the Guy in the water wings...
GZ I have cited at least three or more works by independent researchers (including those working for the Sorenson Genetics Inst.) that have repudiated Crandall’s reinterpreted research by Rosenberg.
It does not matter if you cite a hundred works all saying the DNA of the American Indians tested came from a single village in China, becasue the Book of Mormon does not claim the Americas was peopled excusively by any specific genetic marker set, so you will never prove it wrong that way, your base premise is wrong.
As for repudiating Keith crandall's work, all he said was that if you want to look for evidence of Lehi's DNA, the mynas is the right place to start looking. He did not say it was conclusive evidence.
Here are the Videos for anyone who wants to watch them:
part 1 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
part 2 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
Part 3 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
GZ selective memory on the fundamentals of the argument is bordering intellectual dishonesty DU.
It's funny you should mention that, after all the quotes I have Given you from the Book of Mormon showing the different groups and how some were "Proud" of their genealogy, after the Videos of Experts who take apart your theories and it's like talking to a wall (service with a thud!) you don't seem to learn or retain any of it, to have you bring this up is well, just funny.
GZ What independent research or study outside FARMS have you set forth in your defense (crickets. . . crickets . . . . crickets . . . crickets).
Who CARES! Where are the muslim studies backing up the Bible?
Where are the Jewish studies supporting Jesus and his ascention?
OF COURSE the studies supporting the Book of Mormon come first and formost from the church and Momrons, what moron would expect people to research and write things supporting a religion they don't believe in.. Oh, sorry about that.
GZ GZ This is the kind of source spoken of by Sorenson:
DU I'll skip your quote since it's just an ad homonym attack on Mormons (suprise!)
GZ ROFLAICGU. Lurkers, the Sorenson quote was given by the Sorenson of FARM/Maxwell Institute of BYU / Mormon fame!
The way you run Quotes and attacks together leaves me unsure where one starts and the other ends, I'm just not going to play that Game.
<--Snipping out a bunch of insults mixed with other stuff-->
GZ But these horse/tapir arguers are the mormon apologists themselves, LOL. Horses were VERY common in Israel 600 BC DU. And as the simple phot comparison shows, even a kid can see the difference.
In this thread I linked you to Pictures of horse, Carvings of Horsea and ArcheologicalCarbon dated skeletons of horses, you reject them all nad act like "See there is no evidence" see your intellectual dishonesty comments above, and go look in the mirror.
DU Why would anyone need to do that if there were real horses in the US?
GZ Denial, you’re not in Egypt any more DU, you in the flow of your own apologetic – a mile wide and half inch deep and sinking fast. What a lousy metaphor. First you say I'm Drowning, then i'm half of an inch deep, then i'm sinking in the 1/2 inch deep water. Wow, I don't think I could mess upa metapho that bad if I tried...
Let me try, you can lead a man to knowledge, but he's still a spherical Cow.
How'd I do?
DU You are a bit behind the times, fairLDS has put this video on you tube :Horses and The Book of Mormon.
GZ Again, only more muddle from a faith promoting rumor site. Where are the independent journal articles that address horses exist in the Americas 600 BC to 400 AD? Still waiting (crickets. . . . crickets)
Again, you cut the link, because you don't like what it says Horses and The Book of Mormon
As for the "independent studies" they are in the same place that independent studies say from Buddhists are about tha authenticity of the Bible. (What an illegitamate question! What time is your name... Crickets...)
DU This is sooooo Funny Coming from you Guys! Ya Got this Guy Simon Southerton who left the church (having an affair while Faculty at BYU is not a resume enhancement...) then goes outside his area of expertise and writes a book that Co-opts other peoples DNA studies (for other things) and reinterprets their data to "disprove" the Book of Mormon,
GZ Fellow Freepers and lurkers. Please notice that DU is not below an homonym attacks. But just how accurate is his information? For starters Southerton was not facility at BYU, he lives in Australia. Secondly, allegations of a sexual affair associated with excomunication are standard fair with mormons. Thirdly, he left the church in 1998, published the book in 2004 and only later and in 2005 (after being a non attender for 7 years) was excommunicated. The charge of adultry was never sustained.
First, Ad Homonym attacks come from attacking your opponent by calling them names, not from calling other people names, I could call Simon Southerton anything I wanted and it's not an Adhomonym attack I am not debating him. See Argumentum ad Hominem .
Second, on the Site I linked contains the following Quote "according to an email he sent to the Associated Press he confirmed he was excommunicated him for "having an inappropriate relationship with a woman," You are correct, he had his affair while a bishop, not a BYU professor, still not a way to stay in the church. You might also be interested in his initial reason fro Doubting the church, According to This document His first dissatisfaction was with the churches support for the Flood which he does not think happened...
Here is an interesting Quote from his letter:
The principles of DNA analysis are applicable to all living things so it was relatively easy to jump from the plant to the animal kingdom.He then talks about how he acquired other people's papers and re worked their research... This quote is also notable:
Until this point in my life my intellectual study of the Book of Mormon was minimal.Which explains why he didn't know that a comparison of Jewish DNA with a corrupted and Diluted DNA sample from the house of Joseph would be a useless endeavor.
FYI Tribe membership, according to Hebrew tradition is passed by the Mother, and since Judah and Joseph had different wives (and Joseph's wife was taken in Egypt) then Her mtDNA would be vastly Different then Judah's wife. I match would actually be a problem for the Book of Mormon.
The Ten Tribes Traveling North (slowly) and leaving DNA behind as some married in and stayed would mean matchingDNA from Siberia actually makes sense. (LOL, I can see a Gozilla mask with a Scooby Doo look on it's face going "WHat?") LOL!
You should go read Simon's letter, you'd like it...
DU Keith Crandall, an actual Population Geneticist? Well, He finds out this guy, Simon Southerton, is using his work, and may make him look bad.
GZ The great Crandall who also uses other peoples work, or rather misuses it, (Rosenberg) and is shown to be inept when follow independent studies (Wang and the one involving the Sorensen Genetics Inst.).
Really, so by stating "Hey if this is what you want to look for this is a good place to look", he misused a study ROTFLOL!
DU Now, if horses were in the America's in 10,000 BC, when did they leave? (we don't know yet)
GZ They didn’t leave DU, they went extinct along with many other species at the time. Bottom line is that they were not around at bom times.
And we know this How? When exactly did they go extinct? Oh, It's the lack of evidence thing, we don't have evidence you know, except for some bones that carbon date to the right time, you know, except for those. Oh and the Paintings of horses that predate Columbus, oh and the carvings of horses (I linked to all this stuff previously on this thread)
Godzilla, has evidence ever been found that was lacking before? Has "new Evidence" ever changed Archeological theory? (this is why "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" we have not found everything we are going to find yet.) DU Let's see, so far in this post you have linked to three whole sites, one about horses not being around when the Spaniards got here (A point that is not in dispute) and a couple of Archeology sites that show horses were here, but 10,000 years ago. So how does your including those sites do anything? It muddies the water that is all.
GZ Being dishonest with the lurkers again DU. I could go back and continue to re post and re-post and re-post like you do – or I can trust the readers with being able to follow back. Your best seem to link to UFO websites.
I have never been dishonest, I have been witty, engaging and logical.
And since you have now linked a site that has aliens in the header, a UFO to you too.
GZ We are not talking about a spiritual truth here DU, we are talking about a book that claims to document the history and origins of the native Americans 600 BC – 400 AD. Paul made the solid connection – that if Jesus did not rise from the dead (a statement of fact) then our faith (spiritual truth) is in vain.
DU Yes, Paul made that statement, but it was a spiritual statement, not a provable fact. Jesus did indeed rise from the tomb, Jesus did indeed teach, and eat and heal the sick after he rose from the dead and then Jesus rose up into the heavens and there is no archeological proof of that, or that he did any of the other things either. GZ Wrong again, Paul is reciting eyewitness testimony.
Joseph Smith is reciting eyewitness testimony, but you reject that...)
GZ Peter in Acts challenges the people who were eyewitnesses to the events of the crucifixion. Mormons Challenge all who want to know Jesus better to read more of his words.
GZ The Jewish leadership’s response shows the same.
The orthodox Christianity's response is the same as the response from the Sanhedrin, the leader of this religion is murdered in cold blood.
GZ And the archaeological proof is in the documents those eyewitnesses wrote and were preserved to tell of those events. the journals of those present, the church records, people were miraculously preserved to tell the tale... Oh, wait, They are Mormons and not credible. GZ We can find Pilate’s palace, the Roman facilities, the features of Jerusalem and Israel that Jesus referenced and lived in – all within an archaeological context.
GZ The method of crucifixion, whips, scourges, etc used on Christ have been found from the same era. The temple existed, the list can go on. Where are the pavement stones Jesus stood on here in America DU? You show me those and I’ll be silenced.
You know, there si an old saying fool me once, shame on you fool me twice shame on me. To put it flatly, I don't believe you. Let's say I come up with a piece of stone and some Mormons who having done research say it's where Jesus stood when addressing the Ancient Americans.
I would be willing to bet that the first hing you would do is look up on the internet to see if any of them can be associated with UFOs, next you would see if thay have any skeletons in their closets, Next you would ask if any non Mormons have done any studies on the stone, and of course there won't be any why would there be? Failing finding anything to impugn the character of the men and women supporting this stone as the one Jesus Stood on, I believe you would then say, well, it's just a bunch of Mormons trying to protect their pathetic religion, they don't count... and having dismissed all evidence you would again claim that there was none.
Why? This has been your pattern all along.
I ask you, how many Muslims do research backing up "Christian" history. Now add all the Jews and Buddhists doing similar research. Now add in all the atheists doing research to back up Christianity. Your sum total will be Zero. Science works by people observing, and coming up with theories that they believe could be true, and then trying to find evidence to support their theory. No scientist is looking for evidence to support theories he believes to be wrong, now sometimes they find it anyway and if they do, and if the evidence is strong enough they may change their view, they may become a convert to that theory. There are another group of scientists, ones that I believe to be illegitimate, these scientists have no original Ideas, and all they do is try to poke holes in existing theories and invalidate data. These scientists present no findings of their own, but serve the purpose of fact checking those who might be a bit over zealous in their theories.
It is totally illegitimate to say htat a theory or a religion can't be true because there is no support from those who don't believe in that religion. Of course there isn't. To sum up, If the evidence that has been laid before you is not enough for you to wonder, then I believe if Jesus Christ came to you tonight and told you that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the one and only true church on the face of the earth today; I believe that you would find reasons not to believe him.
DU The Smithsonian will never certify Jesus as a resurected being. There are no scientific peer reviews of papers proving Jesus is the Son of God. These are spiritually discerned truths. I believe that God ordained that it be that way for a reason. You may believe what you wish.
GZ What the Smithsonian does show is that the Bible contains a history that has been tested and proved by archaeology again and again.
The History of the US and most of the Western Culture is that of Christianity, If we did not know more of the middle eastern happenings and history then we do about the Americas which are larger and more recently discovered, then would be a sorry bunch of Christians indeed. I have been to churches in Israel that have been there for centuries. They are an archeological fact because the locations have never been abandoned and lost to history. So what. There are still plenty of atheists who don't believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Archeology is a lousy reason to believe in a religion. I hope you are aware that the Muslims have lots of archeology to support Islam. The Dome of the Rock was built over the rock that Mohamed "ascended to heaven" from. They can "show you the Rock" so are you going to believe in their religion now?
Mormons are Christian (by the definition of the Bible and Because Jesus says we are) Mormons believe in the Bible, it's one of our standard works, we have more scripture than that, so? Mormons support financially and by supplying work and effort to the efforts to use archeology to better understand the Bible. Mormons are the only ones trying to support the Book of Mormon, it only stands to reason that Mormons will be the only ones with supporting studies for the Book of Mormon.
GZ Lurkers will not DU is sluffing off his attack on the Bible by grossly misquoting a letter from the Smithsonian that actually showed they believe and use the Bible in their archaeological studies – something they do not recognize the bom for.
You know, that's not what i got when I read their letter, they did say that parts of it had been validated by archeology, but I didn't get that they "use the Bible" to plan expeditions. YMMV They would probably have said the same thing about the Koran, so?
GZ They cannot prove the supernatural, but they can show that where testable, the bible’s story is reliable. Where are the dozens of cities occupied by an advanced hebraic civilization that practiced Christianity in the New world hundreds of years before Christ? (crickets)
So? Have you ever been to the Mountain Buddha studied on? I have, Did you know they have Archeology Going back to before Christ too? IMHO archeology is not a good way to measure a religion, but if that is where you want to put your faith, hey far be it for me to stop you, I will point out that to me tha's the "arm of flesh" not the "arm of God" but whatever you want to believe, knowck yourself out!
DU I have testified here of direct communication from God just as Paul testified of his direct observation of Jesus' resurrection.
GZ Paul was an eyewitness of the risen Savior, you are not – significant difference DU. You cannot hold a candle to Paul’s testimony.
First, you don't know what I have seen or know. Second Joseph smith is an eyewitness tof the risen savior. Third, no one was "present " when Jesus was resurrected, they simply, elegantly, found the tomb empty. (I'v been there by the way, the garden tomb is such a spiritual place, I loved it!)
GZ That document is already been invalidated by the 2009 findings that included the Sorenson genetic institute. The fact that you don’t bother to examine further (dusty journal of Genetics) shows just how shallow you efforts are. I’ve found and linked plenty of peer reviewed documents and studies, and they continually show Mormon interpretation to be wrong.
DU Garbage in Garbage out, remember? I don't have to look at the output of a program if I know garbage data was fed to it, even if the program works flawlessly you still get garbage out.
GZ Well, that’s what happens when you keep sticking your head in the sand DU. You still will not face up to the fact that a Mormon organization – Sorenson labs – completely repudiated Crandall’s assertion of Hebrew DNA in central America. Garbage in – faith promoting articles from non professional publications like FARMS/Maxwell, FAIR, et al. Garbage out – No DNA evidence, lalalalalalalala, not listening lalalalala.
OK, if I say, Hey, if you want to dig for Buried treasure, Florida is a good place to start. How in the name of all that is funny do you repudiate that? That is what Keith Crandall said. He did not say there is treasure in florida, he said if that was what you wanted to look for, that was a Good place to start.
Go wathc the Video again, that is what he said:
part 1 The Book of Mormon and New World DNADU I don't have to waste time chasing down and disproving every study you come up with because the data is not there to start with. That is what Keith Crandall had to say about Scott Southerton and his DNA recycling of data it's just not possible to prove the negative with the Book of Mormon by it's own tenets because the Book of Mormon does not claim a purely middle eastern group.
part 2 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
Part 3 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
GZ Sigh, This is the report that DU refuses to read and evaluate while trying to castigate me for so called ignoring is fluff youtube pieces. This is the science DU must refuse to face among others for his proofs of mormonism to exist.
OK, GZ, I went and looked at your "study", and as I said before, it has no bearing on the truthfulness of the Book of mormon. Haplogroups D4h3 and X2a could very well have come from where the stidies say they do (I really have no dog in that hunt and Don't care). Because these people they tested were descendents of some of the groups I am sure the Nephites and or Lamanites met and Joined with. The Nephites were the smaller group, and their DNA is from Joseph not Judah, their DNA when found ing the study will not be a majority, they will be the exception, the Junk that is "filtered out". The book of momron does not claim that the American Indians were descended from only or even majorly from Middle eastern Jews, which is the thing anti's are trying to say proves the Book of Mormon wrong, and it's just not claimed by the Book of Momron. This DNA issue is a gigantic straw man argument. The Book of Momron does not has not and will not be disproved by a straw man argument that claims we hold a position that is just not supported by the Book of Mormon. Are there individual Momrons who have held that position? Sure! Fred Phelps claims to be a baptist, but that does not mean what he says represents the Baptist church (he doesn't) he is a really good example of how an individual can really contracdict the fundamentals of a group that just can't shake an embarrassing member.
DU All the "studies" you quote to me, can't get past the erroneous assumption that the Book of Mormon claims a genetically pure group, and since it does not do that they all fall apart, no matter what their methodology.
GZ You see lurkers, because DU allows the garbage in from FARMS apologists, real science continues on to map the movement of man via genetic markers around the world.
Great! So what? They can only map the movement of a group, not the movement of individuals, when they can take a sample of my blood and tell me the names of all my ancestors, call me. other wise they might just miss Lehi, if they even test one of his descendents...
GZ A genetically pure group isn’t necessary to successfully identify heritage.
Actually, it is required, the Lemba people who were traced by Keith Crandall kept their Male line pure and that was why they were able to trace them back.
GZ The Lemba project showed that to be true for a people separated by the same amount of time that Nephi/Lehi and others were separated from Israel.
Um, Yeah, that's not what the People who performed the studies said...
Here read a bit about the Lemba tribe: The Lemba, The Black Jews of Southern Africa
Tudor Parfitt, the protagonist of the NOVA documentary "Lost Tribes of Israel," made a journey through southern Africa to study the unusual traditions of a black African tribe called the Lemba. This Bantu-speaking group claimed Jewish ancestry and observed many Semitic traditions such as kosher-like dietary restrictions and slaughter practices, male circumcision rites, strict rules against intermarriage, and Semitic-sounding clan names."strict rules against intermarriage", Get it? The Book of mormon says they started out intermarrying right off the bat with slaves and anyone else thay met.
This is why a Corrupted sample means all these studies can be right and absolutely not affect the Book ofMomron, it's a straw man argument GZ, and that is what I have been telling you all along, that is why I have been a "one note johnny". The trufullness of the Book of Mormon is not affected by these tests one way or another. Capisce?
Just Google it... Google: Lemba DNA strict rules against intermarriage and weep as your whole posture onthis thread goes down the drain.
DU Then you add to that the fact that most of them are assuming that DNA from the tribe of Joseph and DNA from the tribe of Judah will match well you just don't have a leg to stand on, though it's funny to watch you try.
GZ See, just as you have no grasp of geology, you have no grasp of this science either. If you had bothered to read this independent report. you would have found that the Hebrew DNA Crandall said was there (funny, Crandall refuting you on not being able to ID Hebrew DNA) has been accounted for by the expanded study. What Crandall was trying to put forth as Hebrew DNA just vanished into thin air. But DU wants to continue feeding his mind garbage
Gee, if my grasp of Geology is as bad as my grasp of Early Iron smelting, and my understanding of Population Genetics, maybe I should have your job... Cause I'm spanking you on both of them!!! LOL!
DU No you want to tell me that you know what he was focusing on while doing his research and there is really no way for you to have the foggiest idea.
GZ No, he took part to create this apologetic video, and if he was so blind as not to see that it was to be for propaganda purposes, he was naive. Otherwise, he is being dishonest with the state of the science – see the 2009 study linked above.
Actaully, he was rubbing the straw man nature of the whole thing in the faces of those dumb enough to believe that you can prove a negative with a corrupted DNA sample that's over 2,000 years dilute. LOL!
GZ What Middle Eastern haplotype is he talking about DU, did you pay that much attention? mtDNA X. As I pointed out earlier he references (and misrepresents) Rosenberg’s 2005 study for his evidence.
DU Are you an expert? Do you know he is misrepresenting DNA evidence by interpreting it? How would you know, you are a geologist...
GZ As a scientist, I am a lot closer to understanding the interpretations than a computer programmer.
The proof is in the pudding my FRiend, you don't know as much as you think you do about Iron Smelting, Bog Iron, DNA, the Book of Momron, and or programming. I have been nading you your teeth this whole time and it's been a lot of fun. but the postulate that you just put out was funny! LOL! (in colledge it's Computer Science, which makes me a Scientist and you a Sanitary engineer by comparison.
GZ With that said, where are Crandall’s writings in open, independent journals regarding the mormon in america DNA issues and defending his interpretations of Rosenberg’s 2005 study (Crandall not do his on work – the scandal).
ROTFLOL! He's BAITING you. He never said there was any proof of Jewish DNA, he said "hey if you want to look, look over there!". there is nothing foer him to defend for he didn't conclude anything, he made a suggestion for treasure hunters, and you guys are shocking on it becasue you are not scientists and didn't get the "inside Joke" go watch his face while he's saying it, he's laughing at anyone who will take this and run, and it's funny! ROTFLOL!
GZ The cookies are within reach for even you DU, if you will spend the time outside of FARMS.
If you would stop tossing your cookies all over the screen... and I spend the most ime on Farms when I am linking you guys to it. If you want me to stop going there, stop makeing these reidculous assertions that lack any support other than your mind (it's ot strong enough, you know?) DU and as I keep pointing out, it does no matter if you find DNA from New York City, the Sample was not purely from the Middle east and they keep diluting their Middle eastern DNA as they went.
GZ And this same Crandall the great has already worked on the Lemba study, totally disproving your assertions.
Really, since I gave you the Google search you should have tons of sites talking about how the preserved their DNA by and I quote "strict rules against intermarriage". This WHY they were able to find the DNA link. You are blowing smoke all over and i just ahve to ask what it is you are smoking?
GZ This was known and available to him by a 2003 study stating the same.
DU and he knew it was irrelevant all the time, I'm sure he has more studies than you or I have available to us, since that is his profession, but since they started with a garbage sample that is all they could come out with.
GZ Mind reading for him now? I must have missed the part where he referenced that study in his video segment and said it was irrelevant.
I am assuming that as a professional, in his expertise that he understands at least as much as I do.
On the other hand you are beginning to make me doubt that assement of "professionals"... LOL!
GZ Speaking of Obtuse, do you understand that if you include people of an unknown origin in you population and then continue to add in people of an unknown genetic origin for hundreds and then Thousands of years, you get an unpredictable genetic result?
GZ Lurkers, what DU continues in is a defense of the limited geography theorie’s primary method for accounting for the total lack of any middle eastern DNA markers in the americas.
Limited Geography has nothing to do with it. The Lamanites and the Nephites both married in larger groups of people that were not from Jerusaslem, so DNA results from elsewhere is to be expected.
GZ This teeeeeeeny tiny little group finds a hollow in the midst of pre-existing pre-Colombian tribes and the DNA markers are either absorbed or killed off.
Actually, you don't understand this at all, it does not matter if they intermarried and spread across the land or stayed in a small area, ithikn the Book ofMomorn is vague about it and probaly some discussions were about small areas some were about large areas and God does not care to fulfill your curiosity about which and where.
GZ However, to do this DU (and his FARMS heros), must actually teach that what mormonism’s Presidents and Apostles have taught for the history of mormonism is wrong – that the amerindians here did not descend from hebrews.
Sure thay did, Hebrews just did not contribute the Bulk of the DNA so your studies can't trace it, so? Once upon a time in my ancestry there were some red headed women, and even red headed men, we haven't seen a read head in over a hundred years, does that mean that since tha alleal was lost that we are no longer their descendednts? This is precisely why Mormon's declaration that he was a "pure descendant of Lehi" is so important, by AD 26 such genetic purity of people from Jerusalem was rare, and he and his people were about to be likked off (Which means his genes will not be passed down to the present day).
GZ President Spencer W. Kimball wrote: The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. It is a large group of great people. (“Of Royal Blood,” Ensign, July 1971, p. 7)I like the excerpt, but here is the whole article Of Royal Blood
Let me give you a "better" quote to make your case with:
My brothers and sisters, you belong to a great race. Your father is Joseph who was sold into Egypt, the virtuous man who went to prison rather than yield to the seduction of a queen. Your father was Jacob, the father of twelve sons. You came through one of them. One of the great prophets of all times, your father, was Isaac. Another great prophet, your father, was Abraham, than whom there were no greater ones. Abraham was a great man who walked and talked with God. He is your father back those many generations. Be proud of him and know that you are of royal blood; with your royal blood you can achieve, rising to the top.Please note that even in this quote, President Kimball does nto say they are Pure descendents, just descendents, and that fits what the Book of Momon says to a T
GZ Their first prophet, on the authority of the angel confirmed this to him -
When I was about 17 years old I saw another vision of angels in the night season after I had retired to bed I had not been asleep, … all at once the room was illuminated above the brightness of the sun an angel appeared before me … he said unto me I am a messenger sent from God, be faithful and keep his commandments in all things, he told me of a sacred record which was written on plates of gold, I saw in the vision the place where they were deposited, he said the Indians were the literal descendants of Abraham (The Papers of Joseph Smith, Vol. 2, Journal, 1832-1842, edited by Dean C. Jessee, Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, copyright 1992 Corporation of the President, pp. 69-70, emphasis added).They are literal descendents, just not exclusively descended from. Apparently you don't understand the diffrence.
GZ President Gordon B. Hinckley - The Cochabamba Bolivia Temple was dedicated by President Gordon B. Hinckley in four sessions on 30 April 2000. In his dedicatory prayer, President Hinckley said:
“This nation is named for Simón Bolívar, the great liberator of much of South America, who died the year Thy restored Church was organized. May the incomparable principle of democracy be preserved forever in this republic. We remember before Thee the sons and daughters of Father Lehi. Wilt Thou keep Thine ancient promises in their behalf. Lift from their shoulders the burdens of poverty and cause the shackles of darkness to fall from their eyes. May they rise to the glories of the past. May they recognize their Redeemer and be faithful and true Saints of the Most High.” (Remarks at the dedication of the Cochabamba, Bolivia temple, reported in “News of the Church,” Ensign, July, 2000, p. 74)So? It's not saying what you want it to say, surely over 2,000 years they all have some link to these men, but that does not mean it will be tracable becasue of the many others who they are also descended from.
I have an Idea, Lets "do the Math" on how many ancestors they could have.
Lehi Left 600 years before Christ, it's 2008 AD Now and Jesus was here for 33 years. so we have 2,641 years since Lehi Left Jerusalem according to the Book of Momron.
If we take the Average "Generation" which is not to say lifespan but tha average age of a parent when the average child is born at say 25 (Indians were not known for their longevity and married in the teens) We also need to recognize that each child will have two parents, os our formula goes like this:
2,641 Years / 25 = 105.64 Generations Now we multiply the number of Generations by the number of parents which for people is 2
105.64 * 2 = 211.28 possible ancestors 2,641 years ago. Now lets say one of them was Lehi, and the rest were not, you want to say that DNA tracing is so accurate that you will be able to find that 1 in 211 alleal that ties this person back to Lehi. If you had Lehi's exact Geneome on file, you just might, but you don't you have Jewish DNA Which is the Brother of Lehis' direct ancestor. We would have to add in all those generations then subratct out all the alleals that are not usful for tracking and then filter for alleals that are accedentals (if it can happen once it will happen twice) waht you will end up with is a vanishingly small number of alleals that "might" match and it won't be statistically significant enough to identify them, even though the Indian we took our samle from was actually a direct descendednt of Lehi's you will not be able to prove it with a DNA study. This is the problem you face in proving a negative like this good luck, you'll need it. GZ Mormons – who is telling you the truth?
We Both are.
GZ If it is the Prophet – then FARMS is lying about the inability to find middle eastern (even hebrew) DNA markers in the amerindian population of the Americas.
I often am amazed at the willingness of Anti's to call others liars, I wonder why that is so easy for you to believe of others? But Nope they are not lying either.
GZ If FARMS is correct, then the mormon church is lying to Amerindians and Polynesians in saying, since the mormon church’s inception through today, in saying that they are descendants of Lehi – a Hebrew from Jerusalem.
Actually, nope the Church is telling the truth too. Reality just does not allow you to find what you need to prove a negative, gosh, I'm really saorry to disappoint you, you know?
GZ DU, you who speak of spiritual truth being superior to physical truth – who is telling you the truth?
They all are... and I don't think I said Spirtual truth is supirior to physical truth.
GZ For them to save the bom from science, they must reject the clear pronouncements of every church president from Smith to the present.
Actually, that is your supposition throughout this htread and no matter how many times you dress up tha Cannard and send it out, it's still a straw man argument. I cannot and will not defend what I don't believe, namely that the Book of Mormon says that the Indians are the exclusive progeny of Lehi's group. We just have never held that belief.
Hey, Godzilla, I don't know if you noticed or not, but your straw man is burning!
DU Geologists who argue with population geneticists about DNA studies are as reliable as population Geneticists who try to tell geologists about rock formations, get it?
GZ Or computer programmers who get their faith enhancement tails from UFO sites and think you can wrought iron with your bare hands.
OK, why don't we both start reccomending people pray about it, Hey! Wait a minute, that's been my position all along!!!
DU Again, this is not backed up by the Book of Mormon, they keep meeting groups of people, they have slaves who have married in, they keep diluting their DNA signature and all the wishing and insisting that it's not so is just denial of reality.
GZ Yawn, Lemba tribe is the key stone example of your fallacy DU. Genetic markers are inherited and are passed down and are traceable. That’s the procedure used with the Lemba tribe DU – practical application on a real group of people over the same time frame. You really should have read what i was writing to you, the Lemba people are witnesses on my side, Google: Lemba DNA strict rules against intermarriage, remember? Maybe Fruit, will work, you are comparing apples to watermellon (OK, so watermellon isn't a fruit, can you hear men now?
DU Now all your Halpo type X crap . . . . .
My testimony is not based on science, my testimony is based on God's word to me. That has never been and will never be endangered by any anti Mormon.
GZ See, you challenge me for my sources, I present to you the independent sources and you simply call it crap when it directly refutes what you want to hear – your garbage DU.
It's exactly what i wanted to hear from your side, LOL! It's Irrelavent! The Lemba tribe supports my argument, not yours! The DNA studies you present only matter if the Lemba tribe is loose with their intermarriage, and they could prove their genetics anyway, or the Book of Mormon said it's people preseved a pure genetic strain into modern times. Neither of which is true.
GZ No, your testimony is based upon a subjective experience based upon the word of a man who spun a yarn about the origins of the Amerindians being descendend from Hebrews. That man wrote a book that claimed to be the truth of history here. Nephi never existed, Lehi never existed, the bom cities never existed.
You get all that from an absence of evidence, LOL! You are a piece of workmanship, but I dare say not the best piece.
GZ If NHM is mormonism keystone archaeological find, there should be similar finds a million times over here in the Americas.
Patience Grasshopper, patience. Rome was neither Built nor burnt in a day. By the way, taken a look at your strawman lately? It's time to build a new one...
DU I have tested it and found truth for I started with a testimony of the Bible and an Open mind, you seem to have prejudged and then sought support for your conclusions.
GZ Prejudged? Who called independent science studies crap? Not me. BH Roberts examined the bom with an open mind – and concluded that it was a work of fiction.
The reason they are crap is that unless we drink your kool-aid and agree thet the Book of Mormon doesn't say what it clearly says, or we have to violate the laws of science so that the purity of a sample does not figure into what you can extract from it, then we might be able to come to the same erronious conclusion you have jumped to.
DU The Picture archeologists have of the Americas will have more shocks and more changes, eventually, they will be more in line with the Book of Mormon, I can wait.
GZ The Smithsonian and Nat’l Geographic statements still haven’t changed. The Ensign is not a scientific journal- - when will they do a write up in a real publication?
That all depends on the definition of "Real Publication", and that's just not up to you either.
<--Snip--> Cutting yuor smithsonian stuff as that was already answered.
DU Well, if that's what you are determined to find, and you illegitimately dismiss all evidence to the contrary, then that is what you will conclude and I think you have demonstrated that methodology here very well.
GZ I’ve not dismissed good science as crap, you have not provided any thing that could be legitimally as evidence – unless you believe in UFO’s.
The Reason I called it crap is becasue you didn't understand the requirements for the study (pure sample, Book of Momron history) therefore any conclusion you came to was "crap" I'm sure the actual science was performed correctly it just can't be used to arrive at the conclusion you did legitamately.
<--Snip--> Cutting yuor smithsonian stuff as that was already answered.
DU What I Actually said Was:
GZ Readly available by following the thread. You must think the people here are ignorant.
Then I gave instructions for gettign to exactly where I said it. There is ignorance on display here, but it is not mine.
DU Some metal working is not all metal working. You are claiming steel working by asking for evidence of Smelting and it is never claimed in the Book of Mormon, they do say they used the sword of Laban to make more like it (that can mean copies made of anything, even copper like I said)
DU will probably whine about my cut, just follow the link back if you are interested. A piece of wood with obsidian chips embedded is not the same as what the Hebrews would have identified as a sword. Or now are you saying steel is now obsidian?
I'm not, but the Spaniards called them swords, so why couldn't joseph or Moroni call them swords? (Oh yeah, It dosen't fit the anti the model)
DU What is it with you and Guilt by Association? So, they talk about other things, are you denying that they have found this Guy clad in copper armor? No you instead try to impeach them by other cases they have testified in, you are the one who wants to act like this is a trial, do you understand that such behavior in a court would get me a mistrial and you likely disbarred?
GZ Garbage in – garbage out DU, that’s your motto. They try to legitimize obvious frauds, their endorsement of other evidence is also questionable. Stick with programming, you are losing in the court as credabilty is evaluated there every day.
You know, maybe you are right, the more I associate with you, the worse I look... I mean you support for tha obveous fraud of DNA proving a the Book of Momron wrong, now that just makes everything else you say more questionable and I do legitimize you by stooping to debate you. You have a good point!
DU I am not trying to limit myself to the Smithsonian, I am not trying to disprove every objection to Mormonism that you can bring up, I don't have to, you were going to show us proof that the DNA in American Indians "proved the Book of Mormon Wrong" and instead you want to now add Burrows Cave into the mix? If this were a court of law I would be objecting to the court on the grounds of relevance and unless you could prove DNA was found in Burrows cave my objection would be upheld!
GZ ROTFLAICGU, if a source endorses UFOs and then tries to claim scientific authenticity for their work outside of standard channels of scientific publication it is legitimate to question its truthfulness. If someone endorses frauds also endorses another item, it is more than legit to view that item as suspect in absence of real scientific study. I think you are forgettgin one of the sources you quopted to me had that littel alien up in the corner and had a whole section on UFOs, Pot - Kettle.
DU Again, relevance your honor? Must a Chariot have wheels? Chariots in ancient days also were what we now call litters a platform carried by men. as For wheeled chariots, Miniatures made of clay have been found the full sized ones made of wood rotted too fast to be found in modern times.
GZ LOL, if carried by people, it was called a litter. By definition a chariot was a horse drawn wheeled carriage. While there are toys with wheels, it was never used in the Americas and its use was limited to the old world in pre colombian times In some cultures it was also called a chariot.
DU There are tons of roads, and judging by the state of the road in front of my house, they don't last long, but in South and central America there are tons of roads...
GZ As I said, foot paths. Pre-columbian roads really were not suitable to wheeled transport - feet navigate jungles and mountains far better. Speaking from personal experience in the rediscovery of portions of a large road system in Costa Rica (at Guayabo), the Pre-columbian roads were far from smooth, and would have quickly destroyed wooden or stone wheels. In fact, it was through the invention of iron bands that wooden wheels held up on European cobble-stone streets.
Here is a Road Ancient Ohio's Great Hopewell Highway, as I pointed out, you won't find these in the Smithsonian, becasue as an institution it is bound to be part of the flat earth society when it comes to changing the orthodox view of history in the Americas.
So of course the "Round Earth" anti establishment stuff will have UFOs and other stuff going on by people who are not afraid to step outside the "box" or go over the horizon. Here is a site you'll love, About.com Paranormal Phenomena, it lists a whole bunch of stuff and yes, on page two, the Los Lunas Decalogue stone.
DU Did you go to my links and see the images of horses? The Carvings? No? I guess that's why you dropped that as a requirement for horses... LOL!
GZ Yes I did DU, once again, where are the real scientific studies to justify your interpretations?
Having had horses, I am qualified to recognize one, thanks.
DU Since you have just established that Steel in The Hebrew woild have meant Bronze at that age, obviously the other references to "steel" could also mean bronze, and since you pointed out that the use of copper in America was already proven, and since we have a full set of Copper armor, well, are swords out of the question? If there were no swords, why would he wear the armor? (you should stick to rocks, you are dying here)
GZ You just said that a piece of wood with obsidian in it was a steel sword? Secondly, the copper used was native copper, not mined, not smelted, pounded out cold. Secondly, there is a big difference between copper and bronze – requiring knowledge of adding tin and other elements. You don’t get those other elements by pounding out native copper.
So now people living here for 2,000 years could not have ever developed smelting because they started with their bare hands? I'd love to see the site where the first humans recieved tools from Aliens (since we could never build anything without tools)
Remember, These guys? Dark Ages Re-Creation Company
DU What, with your taxonomy? Of course not! The Book of Mormon does talk about the Jaridites and others that they met here.
GZ All killed except for Coriantumr, unless you want to make you prophets out to be liars.
The others were all killed? I must have missed that verse. Please link me to the verse on the Book of Momon where everyone but Lehi's descendents are killed... (Crickets)
(IJust can't resist leading you like that, put an impeachable thing in front and good old GZ will bite into the unimpeachable that follows LOL!)
DU . It's not a dodge, it's what we have always believed, your quote mining not withstanding and it's what the Book of Mormon says.
GZ President Hinckley recognized the Book of Mormon heritage of his listeners in Lima: “As I look into your faces, I think of Father Lehi, whose sons and daughters you are. I think he must be shedding tears today, tears of love and gratitude. … This is but the beginning of the work in Peru. This work of the Almighty will go on and grow and grow.” (“God’s Holy Work” in Peru, in “News of the Church,” Ensign, Feb. 1997, 73). Who do you believe, your prophet or BYU scholars?
Are you trying to say he meant literal sons and daughters? like as in he was ther bilogical father one generation removed? because if not then clearly he is speaking in metaphor, and clearly he did not say pure blood Lehites. So clearly he was not having a Book of Mormon problem, it's just you...
DU Perhaps you should reavisit the meaning of the word Theory...
GZ I use the current mormonite verbage. Perhaps they should change it to mythology.
LOL! So if you are wrong in your usage it's only becasue we are? I think you and reality have a casual relationship.
DU You may try to decide between theories if you wish, but the Jaridites who came to the americas at the time of the Tower of Babel, clearly predate the people of Lehi.
Gz And killed each other off, so none were left.
I thoght you said they waere the onlyt ones who ever came here... They are but one example of other people, and they certainly did not have "Jewish" DNA, and we actually know that. so when there are others besides them, your "jewish DNA only" Theory Falls apart at the seams.
Again
GZ "Lehi and his company…landed on the continent of South America, in Chili [sic], thirty degrees, south latitude" (Richards, Little, p. 272). This view was accepted by Orson Pratt and printed in the footnotes to the 1879 edition of the Book of Mormon.
And never since, and subsequent leaders have said we don't know where exactly they landed.
Please show a link, I find this a bit too convienient, link?
<--Snip of un sourced quote, as I am gettign tired of looking up your quotes, source or be ignored.-->
GZ If this pronouncement by mormon leaders is correct, middle eastern (hebrew DNA) markers should be found in abundance – the Lemba study more than adequately proved the DNA technology and methdology are more than adequate to prove. Either they did as your leaders say above, or your leaders are liars and have been lying to native Americans for over a hundred years. Postage stamp limited geography theory must disprove the leaders.
The LEmba group as has been abundantly Quoted in this response is completely misunderstood by you as a source for proof that a genetically promiscups ghropu can still be traced, this is fals laogic and a reading comprehension problem on your part.
DU You only quote the parts where they do tell you Genealogy, and leave out the slaves and other people in the group.
GZ Lurkers will note that I addressed the slave issue at least twice now. Mormon leaders view these slaves as being from the middle east and would still carry identifiable DNA markers. As the minority, it would be highly unlikely they would be able to overwhelm BOTH Y and mtDNA markers.
Why is that unlikely? You have a Small group with known DNA that intermarries with a larger group with unknown DNA. Now you take the Descendents of Judah, who the Females will be carrying his wife's mtX markers, and you want to compare descendents of Joseph Who's daughers would be carrying his wifes mtX markers and you are saying these markers from diffrent sources should match? LOL!
You are displaying the same understanding that led you to declair Mormon's "pure descendent of Lehi" pronouncement to mean he had never intermarried with Descendents of one of Lehi's other sons. LOL!
I can see why you work better with reocks, Higher logic and math seem to be a problem for you.
DU You have shown me that you make the following assumptions: Slaves have the same genes as their masters When a group comes over and the Leader has a specific genetic line all the people coming with him have the same genetic line. When a people joins the group, and we are not told their geneology, they are from jerusalem. no-one joined the group without being talked about
These are provably false, all of these assumptions are bad assumptions and the results of a DNA study based on them is bound to be bad as well.
GZ Or really. Live in Jerusalem their lives, claim heritage of Abraham and just happen to come from Jerusalem – Walks like a duck, quack like a duck, it probably is a duck. Your argument still a hollow strawman. Your prophets from Smith to today have pronounced that all native american are descendants of Lehi. Who speaks for the faith – the prophet or the scholars at BYU?
Not all the groups came from Jerusalem, like I said before, they met "others" I gave you scriptures, you ignored and keep saying the same thing as if repitition will make a lie the truth. Good luck with that.
Both The GA's and the schiolars are right, they are descendents, just not full blood descendents.
DU Jacob had two wives, Rachel an Leah. . . . . blah, blah, blah…… So much for tha mtDNA argument (again).
GZ mtDNA would still be traced farther back towards the common maternal ancestor and be of the identified groups. Since we are dealing with peoples who remained within a common ancestral area, as well as common intermarraige between families, the pool would be considered conservative. While your little example fails to account for Y chromosonal markers as distinctive as mtDNA. Go back to the Genome project site linked earlier, and you will see the fallacy of your argument.
I guess my logic was just to painful to post...
I guess we could go all the way back to Eve, wait why don't women all have tha same DNA then? Oh yeah, that is why we are limited in how far back we can go, the DNA is a lossy way to store uniqueness.
DU Then you top that with the Jaridites,
GZ All killed off
Who prove the Book of Mormon talks abou tothers being here. The jaridites were only talked about because of the records they left and the interpeters that came with them that could be passed down with the records to aid in translation. The Nephites talk of others and don't say where they came from you just want to assume they all came from Jerusalem, and a scientist can't do that.
DU Mulekites
GZ Descendant of King Zedekiah, a jew
Mulek was the last of his line because his family had all been killed, the rest we don't know who or where they came from, just that they were more numerous than the Nephites and Lamanites. (Right here not knowing their genetic makeup you lose the ability to preove a negative with science.
DU and people of Zarahemla,
GZ Jews who left Jerusalem about the same time as Lehi (bom never says why they got there first)
Some of them were Jews, It als says they had joined several groups who's genetics are unknown to us.
DU . . . . . and you have to ask, OK, the People of Zarahemla, they talked about them because that was the first group and it was larger than them.
GZ The were fellow Jews from Jerusalem – unless the bom is lying
Some of the people of zarahemla were definately from Jerusalem, but we are not given the genetics of all, and the People of Zarahemla took in Coriantumer, and then the people of Lehi. The Book of Momron has them become numerous quickly, too quickly for birth to account for it, They married in with other groups that were not remarkable enough to talk about in this scriptureal record.
DU The Jaridites were mostly killed off,
GZ Incorrect, everyone is killed except Coriantumr. One survivor hardly makes some
Ah, but if you were interested in truth, you'd have to admit that the theory you are espousing that the Nephites landed in a land that was empty. If they could find the jaridites, who else was here? all but one was killed is sononomous with most were killed in my book.
DU Then when you realize that for those groups all you know about thtem is the Geneology of their leaders, well no one interested in the truth wiould ignore that.
GZ All from Jerusalem – descendants of Abraham.
So you assume in spite of the evidence to the contrary.
<--Snip another un sourced quote-->
DU Lurkers will note that Godzilla has never even admitted the possiblity that the DNA might not be pure even though the Book of Mormon clearly indicates it. LOL!
GZ Lurkers, we will see who wears the pants in mormonism. Does the prophet who says all amerindians are descendants of Lehi, or the scholars down town at BYU.
Again wiht the assumptions, you assume we wear pants (just funning with you, we do)
Again you seem to have a problem with the concept of being a descendent without being a pure blood descedent we have no such limitation.
DU Your article Begs the question of whether or not the DNA is pure enough to obtian a significant result.
GZ Once again, DNA purity is only an issue for the lab. Aparently the DNA was pure enough for geneticists to follow the lineage of the Lemba back to Israel. DU only rejects evaluation of the evidence to the contrary because it is just that – contrary.
That was, once again because the Lemba had Strict rules against intermarriage, the people in the Book of Momon did not.
The Lemba, The Black Jews of Southern Africa
Tudor Parfitt, the protagonist of the NOVA documentary "Lost Tribes of Israel," made a journey through southern Africa to study the unusual traditions of a black African tribe called the Lemba. This Bantu-speaking group claimed Jewish ancestry and observed many Semitic traditions such as kosher-like dietary restrictions and slaughter practices, male circumcision rites, strict rules against intermarriage, and Semitic-sounding clan names.DU READ MY LIPS, I DON'T CARE WHERE THE BACTERIA CAME FROM IN THE BODY. The DNA of Gastrointestinal DNA suffers from the same problems of evidence as DNA. It's not relevant unles and until you can establish that there was a "pure" sample according to the Book of Mormon (and that's not what it says).
GZ Lurkers see here a real example of a closed mind and an overdose of garbage in from FARMS because of being ignorant of examining the issue
Godzilla you have been playing with rocks so long your head has begun o resemble some of their proerties. I have examined the issue and have completely repudiated your position from the Book of Momon, and from Science, yet you continue to post drivel about purity not mattering, and Iron couldn't be smelted with charcoal, LOL! Yes, Lurkers, note how Godzilla does what he accuses me of doing...
<--Snip A bunch more iin linked quotes.-->
Godzilla, again to make it simple enough for you, Momron leaders have said and I agree wiht them that th American Indians are descendednts of Lehi. I assert that they are not pure blood and that their DNA signiture may even be unreadable after the dilution if has gone through over the ages. GZ Sounds like your model does not square up with what your leaders continue to proclaim DU. Your leaders say something completely different. I think the burden of proof is on you. Your leaders say that the amerindians are descended from the lamanites, who in turn were descendants of Lehi.
Yes, you always think the burden of proof is on others, that was as predictable as gravity.
Godzilla, this is a perfect time for me to point out that you keep making fun of me and calling me stupid when I say somehting like that Nephi Could have smelted ore to make the tools to make a ship, yet here we are I am now teaching you about anchient smelting techniques and to be quite frank, if you were a student I was teaching you'd be expelled. Get up off of your duff and do some research. You make these Broad sweepiong staements like the Book of Momron is disproved by DNA and when it comes right donw to it, it's impossible becasue the Book of Momron does not claim a pure sample of DNA to compare with a pure sample of the tribe of Joseph which you also don't have. Then you want to play archeologist and pontificate on archeological data htat neither you or I have ever seen. You don't even seem to know when you have been handed your logical teeth, but you sure can post a longwinded boring post with no links, no pictures, and no intelligence behind it.
Thank you for making me look Good (and I mean really Good) by comparison, but I have a trip to plan for and I'll be gone all next week. So while I'd like to stay and play, youre really not that fun to play with.
Let me iterate my points on this thread:
- The Book of Momorn does not claim that all or even the majority of the people who came to the americas came from jerusalem, therefore saying the DNA doesn't come from there is irelavent.
- The Lemba people were tracable only becasue they had Strict rules agains intermarriage.
- The Lamanites and Nephites had no such rules
- Smelting is something that can be done with crude impliments
- Momrons do not say the Indians are pure blood
- Mormon leaders so not say the Indians are pure blood
- DNA that is diluted can only be traced back a few hundred years, 2,641 is just too many years and generations to trace a diluted DNA signiture through.
- The burden of proof is upon you for you are the one claiming to prove something wrong.
