Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Runtu »

I really do try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I swear, every time I look up the primary sources in apologetic articles, it's always either not there or totally distorted. Take the FairMormon article about elephants in the Americas.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Animals/Elephants


First of all, they say that mammoths were in the Americas as recently as 3,000 years ago, putting them in Jaredite times. How do they get this dating? An article in a popular magazine, Scientific Monthly, written in 1952 by Ludwell Johnson, a Civil War historian. More recent actual science tells us that mammoths became extinct in the late Pleistocene era, which is much earlier.

They then give us some dates from isolated islands in the Bering Sea, plus this little tidbit:

In the contiguous United States Mead and Meltzer provided an age of 4,885 years for a dated mammoth specimen. (James I. Mead and David J. Meltzer, “North American late Quaternary extinctions and the radiocarbon record, In P. S. Martin and R. G. Klein (eds.) Quaternary Extinctions: A Prehistoric Revolution, (Tucson, University of Arizona Press. 1984), 440-450.)


Going to the article in question, we find that the authors rated the specimens by reliability, and they state that they consider those samples with a rating of 8 or above to be reliable. The age Brown and Roper give is from a single sample rated at a reliability of 6, thus below their standard for reliability. Plus, the sample is from bone collagen, about which they say:
 
It is important to note that after we had examined the data it was apparent that collagen-derived dates were behaving unpredictably, often giving internally inconsistent results. This reinforces the cautions of Taylor (1980) and others on the use of this material in dating; thus we viewed collagen-derived dates, regardless of their score, with some suspicion.


So, is FairMormon correct that these scientists concluded that Mammoths lived until 2,500 years BC? Here's the relevant part of their conclusion:

When one considers only those genera for which we have demonstrably reliable dates (those with a score of 8 or better) that are not derived from bone collagen (Camelops, Equus, Mammut, Mammuthus, Nothrotheriops, Panthera), a familiar pattern appears. These reliable dates, predictably on genera for which we have relatively large sample, indicate that late Pleistocene extinctions laster no later than 10,000 year B.P. and possibly were complete by 10,800 year B.P. ...

Mammut, the predominantly eastern taxa, may have become extinct by approximately 14,000 year B.P. in the western states, although this western sample is extremely small. ... It appears that the mammoth became extinct at approximately the .same time in both the eastern (10,600 year B.P.) and western states (10,500 year B.P.)


To recap, Roper and Brown would have us accept a date from a sample that did not meet the researchers' criteria for reliability and were of a sample type that the researchers caution is wildly unreliable.

There's also a citation from John Swanton about the mythical beast (actually it is just one beast) that Fair says acts like an elephant:
 
A long time ago a being with a long nose came out of the ocean and began to kill people. It would root up trees with its nose to get at persons who sought refuge in the branches, and people lived in scaffolds to get away from it.


I should point out that, contra Fair, it doesn't say anything about trampling.

Later, Fair tells us "Similar traditions have been documented for Native American groups from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico persuading some scholars that they are based upon a core memory of actual historical encounters with elephant-like species who may have survived into the region as late as 3,000 years ago."

Again, this is a summary of the Ludwell Johnson article, though it's presented as if it's further evidence for the 3.000-year dating.

These myths could possibly reflect cultural memory of mammoths, but the dating from the Fair article is off by about 7,000 years.

Then comes this bit, which made my jaw drop:
 
Pre-Columbian traditions from Mexico tell of monstrous ogre-like giants who once inhabited the region and were subsequently killed following the arrival of Aztec ancestors. These tales attribute some human characteristics to these legendary giants, while other ones seem less so. The giants were said to have long tapering arms and could tear up trees as if they were lettuce.


I don't know what to say about this one, as the reference in Torquemada (which is incorrectly cited, as it should be 1:32) is to a chapter about giant men. The story cited is that the Tlaxcalteca encountered a heavily armed group of very tall and strong men. Knowing they could not hope to prevail against these giant men, the Tlaxcaltecans pretended to have peaceful intentions and invited the giants to dine with them. Once the giants were intoxicated, the Tlaxcaltecans stole the giants' weapons and then ran and hid in the trees. Upon awakening, the giants are said to have broken the branches of the trees off as if they were merely stripping leaves (not lettuce), but the Tlaxcaltecans eventually prevailed against the unarmed and drunken giants.

Torquemada, citing Acosta and his own experience, tells us that the Spaniards had found two fossilized giant's teeth that were as big as a man's fist and weighed 2 pounds. He talks about finding long thigh bones and a very large skull, but there's nothing about long, tapered arms. And Torquemada tells us the giants weren't killed by the Aztecs but died off because, aoccording to local legend, there wasn't enough food to support their large bodies.

Does this sound remotely like an elephant to anyone? I would suggest that the FairMormon folks either remove or heavily revise the article about elephants. I can't decide if it's just poorly researched or willfully dishonest. I hope it's the former.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Quasimodo »

Runtu wrote:Does this sound remotely like an elephant to anyone? I would suggest that the FairMormon folks either remove or heavily revise the article about elephants. I can't decide if it's just poorly researched or willfully dishonest. I hope it's the former.


Well, you were able to access reliable sources and sniff out the bad ones. Even I, a rank amateur, was able to find quite a bit of reliable information in just a few minutes of Googling. I don't think there is any reason that the folks at FairMormon couldn't have done the same.

I think this points strongly to your second conclusion.

While playing around, I did notice that the last mammoths lived on Wrangle Island around 1700 BC. Maybe Wrangle Island is the place apologists talk about in their limited geography theories.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Runtu »

Quasimodo wrote:Well, you were able to access reliable sources and sniff out the bad ones. Even I, a rank amateur, was able to find quite a bit of reliable information in just a few minutes of Googling. I don't think there is any reason that the folks at FairMormon couldn't have done the same.

I think this points strongly to your second conclusion.

While playing around, I did notice that the last mammoths lived on Wrangle Island around 1700 BC. Maybe Wrangle Island is the place apologists talk about in their limited geography theories.


That's what I said: we now have the heartland, mesoamerican, and tiny Alaskan island settings for the Book of Mormon. by the way, the mammoths on Wrangel Island were dwarf mammoths, between 5 and 6 feet tall. Perfect size to pull Nephite chariots.

Yeah, I think it's dishonest, too. How do they justify manipulating sources like this? It's shameful.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_Tobin
_Emeritus
Posts: 8417
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:01 pm

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Tobin »

You do realize the Jaredites could have brought the elephants with them.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey Tobin! :smile:

Tobin wrote:You do realize the Jaredites could have brought the elephants with them.


I think you may have it bass ackwards - I am pretty sure that the elephants brought the Jaredites.

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Doctor Steuss
_Emeritus
Posts: 4597
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:57 pm

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Doctor Steuss »

Tobin wrote:You do realize the Jaredites could have brought the elephants with them.

Not only were they able stuff their 8 saucer boats with at least a breeding pair of every type of animal they had "flocks" of, fish, birds, bees, and seeds of every kind. But they also managed to bring with them at least two elephants and enough food to sustain them for 344 days (which, if they were baby elephants, would conservatively been about 30 tons).

And just like that, the Jaredite voyage became even more marvelous. With God, all things are truly possible.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
_Tobin
_Emeritus
Posts: 8417
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:01 pm

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Tobin »

Doctor Steuss wrote:
Tobin wrote:You do realize the Jaredites could have brought the elephants with them.

Not only were they able stuff their 8 saucer boats with at least a breeding pair of every type of animal they had "flocks" of, fish, birds, bees, and seeds of every kind. But they also managed to bring with them at least two elephants and enough food to sustain them for 344 days (which, if they were baby elephants, would conservatively been about 30 tons).

And just like that, the Jaredite voyage became even more marvelous. With God, all things are truly possible.


We are talking about SEALED craft propelled by the waves with artificial light that could flip over and not dump the occupants on their heads with all their belongings and waste. If such craft were actually built, they were engineering marvels and I doubt carrying elephants is much of a stretch.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Quasimodo »

Doctor Steuss wrote:Not only were they able stuff their 8 saucer boats with at least a breeding pair of every type of animal they had "flocks" of, fish, birds, bees, and seeds of every kind. But they also managed to bring with them at least two elephants and enough food to sustain them for 344 days (which, if they were baby elephants, would conservatively been about 30 tons).

And just like that, the Jaredite voyage became even more marvelous. With God, all things are truly possible.


I'm not sure if one pair of elephants is enough to produce a genetically viable population in a new land. Maybe Ceeboo is right. Elephants can swim, so the barges must have been pulled to the western hemisphere by herds of swimming elephants.

It would make an inspiring mural in the LDS visitor's center.
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _Kishkumen »

Yep. This is just one of a number of Mopologetic problems that gives the whole enterprise a very bad name. Too often you find them using that outdated citation or rare instance of something that adds zero plausibility to Mormon claims. By setting all of this out in plain view, FAIR is contributing to the demise of Mormonism. It just looks patently stupid and disrespectful of the members.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Sometimes Apologists Piss Me Off

Post by _sock puppet »

Runtu wrote:...

Mormon apologetics = disingenuous
Post Reply