bomgeography wrote:at least you admit breastplate and headplate artifacts and cloth are confirmed artifacts
No he didn't.
Steelhead wrote:The problem isn't Tapir, or Lemmie not agreeing with you, it is the best archeological, anthropological, and genetic evidence does not agree with your conclusions.
bomgeography wrote: at least you admit breastplate and headplate artifacts and cloth are confirmed artifacts
Are you accusing me of saying that those items are hoaxes but now I admit otherwise? And what do you mean by "at least"? David McKane, why would you make such a ridiculous claim about me? You know that I have never argued that authentic artifacts are hoaxes. Why would you twist things like this? You would do better to explain what you mean about the Michigan relics. Incidentally, the use of woven fabric in the region of the United States dates back long before the timeline of the Jaradites. It provides no evidence at all for the Book of Mormon. Breastplates and headplates don't support the authenticity of the Book of Mormon either. They were known about before Joseph Smith came along. In fact, breastplates and headplates provide for a strong argument that the Book of Mormon is made up. Those are things that Joseph Smith could easily have known about.
bomgeography wrote: at least you admit breastplate and headplate artifacts and cloth are confirmed artifacts
Are you accusing me of saying that those items are hoaxes but now I admit otherwise? And what do you mean by "at least"? David McKane, why would you make such a ridiculous claim about me? You know that I have never argued that authentic artifacts are hoaxes. Why would you twist things like this? You would do better to explain what you mean about the Michigan relics. Incidentally, the use of woven fabric in the region of the United States dates back long before the timeline of the Jaradites. It provides no evidence at all for the Book of Mormon. Breastplates and headplates don't support the authenticity of the Book of Mormon either. They were known about before Joseph Smith came along. In fact, breastplates and headplates provide for a strong argument that the Book of Mormon is made up. Those are things that Joseph Smith could easily have known about.
The hopewell are the Nephites. Their culture DNA artifacts expansive trade and Native American linguistic culture artifacts trAditional believes all support testify of this but to each their own. If you do not see it the way I do that's fine. From what I can tell we see confirmed artifacts and data differently.
bomgeography wrote: at least you admit breastplate and headplate artifacts and cloth are confirmed artifacts
tapirrider wrote:Are you accusing me of saying that those items are hoaxes but now I admit otherwise? And what do you mean by "at least"? David McKane, why would you make such a ridiculous claim about me? You know that I have never argued that authentic artifacts are hoaxes. Why would you twist things like this? You would do better to explain what you mean about the Michigan relics. Incidentally, the use of woven fabric in the region of the United States dates back long before the timeline of the Jaradites. It provides no evidence at all for the Book of Mormon. Breastplates and headplates don't support the authenticity of the Book of Mormon either. They were known about before Joseph Smith came along. In fact, breastplates and headplates provide for a strong argument that the Book of Mormon is made up. Those are things that Joseph Smith could easily have known about.
bomgeography wrote:The hopewell are the Nephites. Their culture DNA artifacts expansive trade and Native American linguistic culture artifacts trAditional believes all support testify of this but to each their own. If you do not see it the way I do that's fine. From what I can tell we see confirmed artifacts and data differently.
Why don't you deal with your false accusation of me? And please explain why you say that the Michigan relics are fake but real. David McKane, all archaeologists and credible scholars see the confirmed artifacts differently than you do. And no geneticist concurs with your DNA claims. Why do you keep singing this same song?
bomgeography wrote: at least you admit breastplate and headplate artifacts and cloth are confirmed artifacts
tapirrider wrote:Are you accusing me of saying that those items are hoaxes but now I admit otherwise? And what do you mean by "at least"? David McKane, why would you make such a ridiculous claim about me? You know that I have never argued that authentic artifacts are hoaxes. Why would you twist things like this? You would do better to explain what you mean about the Michigan relics. Incidentally, the use of woven fabric in the region of the United States dates back long before the timeline of the Jaradites. It provides no evidence at all for the Book of Mormon. Breastplates and headplates don't support the authenticity of the Book of Mormon either. They were known about before Joseph Smith came along. In fact, breastplates and headplates provide for a strong argument that the Book of Mormon is made up. Those are things that Joseph Smith could easily have known about.
bomgeography wrote:The hopewell are the Nephites. Their culture DNA artifacts expansive trade and Native American linguistic culture artifacts trAditional believes all support testify of this but to each their own. If you do not see it the way I do that's fine. From what I can tell we see confirmed artifacts and data differently.
Why don't you deal with your false accusation of me? And please explain why you say that the Michigan relics are fake but real. David McKane, all archaeologists and credible scholars see the confirmed artifacts differently than you do. And no geneticist concurs with your DNA claims. Why do you keep singing this same song?
Im stating my opinion about the Michigan relics.
I'm not here to talk about you.
Concerning The non confirmed artifacts if you agree with the archeologist that the thousands of Michigan relic artifacts are fake that is fine. If you do not see the hopewell confirmed matching artifacts and timeline and DNA from the Middle East also confirmed that's fine.
tapirrider wrote:Are you accusing me of saying that those items are hoaxes but now I admit otherwise? And what do you mean by "at least"? David McKane, why would you make such a ridiculous claim about me? You know that I have never argued that authentic artifacts are hoaxes. Why would you twist things like this?
bomgeography wrote: I'm not here to talk about you.
David McKane, when you make an accusation, you need to deal with it. If you don't want to talk about me then don't falsely accuse me of saying things.
bomgeography wrote:Im stating my opinion about the Michigan relics.
So you do believe they are real? I hope you can understand that when you say they are fake and then say they are real it doesn't make your position clear, in fact it becomes down right confusing just what you are trying to say.
bomgeography wrote:Concerning The non confirmed artifacts if you agree with the archeologist that the thousands of Michigan relic artifacts are fake that is fine. If you do not see the hopewell confirmed matching artifacts and timeline and DNA from the Middle East also confirmed that's fine.
It isn't just me David. No archaeologist, geneticist or credible scholar sees the authentic artifacts and DNA the way you do. It is not "fine". When you promote a pseudo history of a people you know nothing about you will be challenged and your errors exposed. Why do you keep doing this?
bomgeography wrote:Concerning The non confirmed artifacts if you agree with the archeologist that the thousands of Michigan relic artifacts are fake that is fine. If you do not see the hopewell confirmed matching artifacts and timeline and DNA from the Middle East also confirmed that's fine.
tapirrider wrote:It isn't just me David. No archaeologist, geneticist or credible scholar sees the authentic artifacts and DNA the way you do. It is not "fine". When you promote a pseudo history of a people you know nothing about you will be challenged and your errors exposed. Why do you keep doing this?
McKane seems determined to trash the reputation of Mormons with his nonsense.
I've quoted this before but it bears repeating, given McKane's insistence on repeatedly starting threads over and over with the exact same fully debunked and nonsensical opinions:
In the past, many scholars have pointed to a sometimes explicitly racist agenda behind the claims of diffusionists who argue that the glories of Native American civilizations were achieved only through borrowing from various Old World groups. The producers of the Lost Civilizations of North America and the diffusionists they feature in their documentary turn this argument on its head by suggesting that it is instead those “mainstream” scholars who are the real racists because they deny Native Americans their role in an already globalized world of the early centuries of the Common Era. However, the only support for this picture of Native American–Old World interactions two thousand years ago comes from resurrected frauds and distorted history. There is no credible archaeological or genetic evidence to suggest that any Old World peoples migrated to the Americas after the initial incursion from Siberia prior to the tentative forays of the Norse beginning at around 1000 CE other than limited contacts between Siberia and the American arctic. http://www.csicop.org/si/show/civilizat ... l_messages
[emphases added by me.] This excerpt is from a three part series where academic researchers fully document the research that debunks ideas such as McKane's.
Beyond the childish level of McKane's "research," he continues to be impervious to how insulting and demeaning the entire rest of the world finds conclusions such as his.
A very good video of Dr. Jennifer Raff speaking about genetics and pseudo claims. She addresses some of the things that David makes claims about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BuRECUOsx0