Dan Peterson, Right on Cue! Book of Mormon Possibly True

[_Quasimodo]

DNA, DNA, DNA ... when will mopologists come to grips with this remarkable science?

You'd think they'd know something what with the church collecting data for years.

Great point!

[_Jersey Girl]

Great point!

Hey, I pay attention.

[_moksha]

Remember the church has lots of colored balls.

Various shades of blue doth prove true.

[_Water Dog]

He obviously pays very close attention to Water Dog's posts.

Not the first time.

[Guest]

An interesting graph.....because?

The DNA study originally stated is taken from 633 Mayans. Your graph is a study of Native Americans. NOT the same thing. Would a study of Native Americans show links throughout Europe? Yes, of course. Anyone who has spent time on reserves or involved with concrete natives throughout North America could see that with a blindfold on.

The 633 Mayans analysed comes from about 7 different published papers. Mayans are Native Americans so your claim they are NOT the same thing is not true for the exercise I was undertaking.

The point I was making was that scientists can tell where the very small amount of European admixture comes from. When scientists study the origins of American Indians they try to avoid people with recent admixture. Its impossible to avoid it completely and they often find 1 or 2 percent with European or African DNA. Using whole genome analysis they find that the European admixture is virtually all from Western Europe.

Yes, there are heaps of living Native Americans who obviously have lots of European DNA in their family tree. These people would not have been included in the ancestry studies I am talking about because they have so much admixture. I don't get your point.

[_Simon Southerton]

But there are other studies showing the opposite, that quite a bit of non-native DNA comes from the Middle East, via Spain and Potugal. Sephardic Jews and Conversos most likely.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/01/23/252155

I don't agree that the publication you cite shows the "opposite" result. The vast majority of the admixed DNA in the Latin American populations studied was from Western Europe. A small percentage of the DNA came from the Sephardic community (from 1% in Brazil up to 4% in Columbia), most likely the Sephardic communities on the Iberian Peninsula.

The authors also did chromosome tract analysis to determine when the European and Sephardic DNA admixture entered native populations. It was the same for both Europeans and Sephardic; about 10 generations ago.

[Guest]

I can say, unequivocally, that the Book of Mormon was written in the 19th century. It was written by an author living in North America in the 19th century. It was not written by ancient Hebrew Christians living in North America, Central America, or South America. It is so obviously a 19th century document that it beggars belief that anyone would post Mayan ruins as being relevant to the Book of Mormon in any conceivable way. The only events in the Book of Mormon that reflect actual ancient history were cribbed from the Bible and other sources. Mormon scholars should get real, accept the facts, and write accordingly. It does no one any favors to continue to peddle fantasies about a Book of Mormon that came into existence from the 6th century BC to the 5th century AD. Such a book does not exist. Joseph Smith did not translate ancient Hebrew gold plates in the traditional sense of the word "translate."

[_Maksutov]

I can say, unequivocally, that the Book of Mormon was written in the 19th century. It was written by an author living in North American in the 19th century. It was not written by ancient Hebrew Christians living in North America, Central America, or South America. It is so obviously a 19th century document that it beggars belief that anyone would post Mayan ruins as being relevant to the Book of Mormon in any conceivable way. The only events in the Book of Mormon that reflect actual ancient history were cribbed from the Bible and other sources. Mormon scholars should get real, accept the facts, and write accordingly. It does no one any favors to continue to peddle fantasies about a Book of Mormon that came into existence from the 6th century BC to the 5th century AD. Such a book does not exist. Joseph Smith did not translate ancient Hebrew gold plates in the traditional sense of the word "translate."

+1,000

Can it be accepted as inspired fiction? Can Mormonism continue on as Mormonism without it? How important is scripture really? If you leave the iron rod, these questions have to be answered. Mormon leaders don't like questions.

[_mentalgymnast]

Time to quit fighting the truth and go back to church and pay tithing, the Mayan Megatropolis is in favor of the Book of Mormon.

If the evidence 'in the dirt' hasn't proved the Book of Mormon up to this point in time, I don't expect that it will happen anytime soon.

Millennium maybe?

Regards,
MG

[_Morley]

Time to quit fighting the truth and go back to church and pay tithing, the Mayan Megatropolis is in favor of the Book of Mormon. : rolleyes:

If the evidence 'in the dirt' hasn't proved the Book of Mormon up to this point in time, I don't expect that it will happen anytime soon.

And since Moroni's promise doesn't work for most who try it, what is there left?

No physical proof, no spiritual proof. No proof.

Just a bunch of stories.