The Sacred Curse

[_DrW]

Yes, another case of fact being funnier than fiction....a common theme in Mormonism.

Precisely!

[_Shulem]

Simon,

I received an email from Ed Goble requesting additional information on a the DNA subject:

Since Archaeology seems to have shown that there seems to be no difference between an "Israelite" and a "Canaanite" in ancient times, therefore, it is my understanding that there ought to be no difference genetically. Therefore, known ancient Canaanite DNA ought to be a good sampling for what made up "Israelite" DNA from ancient times.

In the DNA tests that are done comparing Native American DNA to "Jewish" DNA, what is used as the so-called "Jewish" sample? Ancient Canaanite DNA, or modern Jewish DNA. I do not see the two as equivalent, and I think that only ancient Canaanite DNA would be the one to compare it to to determine if Native Americans truly have ancient Canaanite ancestry, instead of "Jewish" DNA that modern Jews have.

And secondly, to what degree does modern "Jewish" DNA show continuity with ancient Canaanite DNA.

Can Mr. Southerton shed light on this?

[_Arc]

Simon,

I received an email from Ed Goble requesting additional information on a the DNA subject: [SNIP]

If Ed Goble is serious, please suggest to him that he invest $7.50 in Dr. Southerton's book and learn not only the answer to his question, but gain enough background and contextual information on human population genetics that he need never ask this kind of naïve question again.

[_Shulem]

If Ed Goble is serious, please suggest to him that he invest $7.50 in Dr. Southerton's book and learn not only the answer to his question, but gain enough background and contextual information on human population genetics that he need never ask this kind of naïve question again.

That sounds like sound advice but let's see if Simon is willing to respond. I'm sure Ed is following the thread and awaiting. He won't be able to respond because he stopped participating on this board in a formal sense.

[_Simon Southerton]

Since Archaeology seems to have shown that there seems to be no difference between an "Israelite" and a "Canaanite" in ancient times, therefore, it is my understanding that there ought to be no difference genetically. Therefore, known ancient Canaanite DNA ought to be a good sampling for what made up "Israelite" DNA from ancient times.

In the DNA tests that are done comparing Native American DNA to "Jewish" DNA, what is used as the so-called "Jewish" sample? Ancient Canaanite DNA, or modern Jewish DNA. I do not see the two as equivalent, and I think that only ancient Canaanite DNA would be the one to compare it to to determine if Native Americans truly have ancient Canaanite ancestry, instead of "Jewish" DNA that modern Jews have.

And secondly, to what degree does modern "Jewish" DNA show continuity with ancient Canaanite DNA.

Can Mr. Southerton shed light on this?

Apologies for the delay. Usual time zone delay and I am visiting relatives in Sydney.

The reference Jewish population included several Sephardic populations scattered throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Scientists screened these, and over 90 other global populations, with about 500,000 genomic DNA markers to identify markers that are specific to the Sephardic populations and not found in neighbouring populations. This has also been done with Ashkenazi, revealing that the two Jewish groups are closely related. Both groups carry thousands of markers that they have collectively inherited from their ancestors and they are used to detect Jewish ancestry.

We don’t really need ancient Jewish DNA to detect Jewish DNA in Native Americans, for precisely the same reason scientists have not needed ancient Asian DNA to conclude Native Americans are of Asian origin. Markers specific to different ethnic groups and populations are carried by their living descendants. That's why its called DNA genealogy.

The bigger problem for the Book of Mormon is that scientists can explain where one hundred point zero, zero...percent of the genomes of Native Americans came from. They can even tell where all the post Columbus admixture came from and when it arrived. Yes, that's right, whole genome research can tell you when foreign DNA entered a Native American's pedigree. In screens of 6,500 Latin Americans from Mesoamerica and South America they detected small traces of Jewish DNA all over the place but it arrived at the same time as the Spanish DNA.

This is all discussed in more detail and context in my book. It's not very expensive and its not very long. I'd be happy to answer any more questions Ed has after he has read my book.

[_Shulem]

This is all discussed in more detail and context in my book. It's not very expensive and its not very long. I'd be happy to answer any more questions Ed has after he has read my book.

You seem like a terrific guy, Simon. Thanks for responding to Ed's request.

Ed, get the book and study it.

[_Craig Paxton]

Simon,

Just a quick question, in my reddit review of your book a poster asked if you addressed the “bottle neck”and “founder effect” apologetic arguments which plays such a large diversionary role in the churches DNA Essay. Can you elaborate on how population genetics impacts these arguments?

Thanks

[_Shulem]

This is all discussed in more detail and context in my book. It's not very expensive and its not very long. I'd be happy to answer any more questions Ed has after he has read my book.

As a matter of interest, Ed emailed me with a response to your response. I trust he will obtain your book and learn more.

That's what I thought. They used the wrong samples when archaeology is clear that they were ancient Canaanites, not modern Jews. I challenge you to actually admit that you have no evidence for continuity of ancient Canaanite DNA in the modern Askenazi and Sephardic populations. You people don't need to talk down to me like I'm an idiot when I see to the obvious and to call you out on the obvious. Nothing else but samplings of ancient Canaanite DNA will do, period. No other sample is acceptable. Otherwise the foundations of your claims are categorically flawed. Archaeology is absolutely clear on what population the native Americans must be compared to.

[Guest]

Blazes.

Ed Goble sees the value in comparing modern Native American DNA to ancient Canaanite DNA, because ancestry leaves persistent traces in DNA that can be read after 3000 years.

But he does not accept that one can substitute modern Jewish DNA for the ancient Canaanite, because ancestry does not leave persistent traces in DNA that can be read after 3000 years.

Did I miss something?

[_Dr LOD]

That's what I thought. They used the wrong samples when archaeology is clear that they were ancient Canaanites, not modern Jews. I challenge you to actually admit that you have no evidence for continuity of ancient Canaanite DNA in the modern Askenazi and Sephardic populations. You people don't need to talk down to me like I'm an idiot when I see to the obvious and to call you out on the obvious. Nothing else but samplings of ancient Canaanite DNA will do, period. No other sample is acceptable. Otherwise the foundations of your claims are categorically flawed. Archaeology is absolutely clear on what population the native Americans must be compared to.

Why don’t we flip that thought. After all he and the church have made these amazing claims. The real issue is God through revelation to Joseph Smith multiple times in the D&C as well as the 1830 pseudo-canonized revelation Lamanite polygamy revelation that the church dug out to justify Joseph Smith’s sex life in their recliner essay. In these the “Lord” was pretty specific on who and where these people were.

What has the DNA shown on these people? Nothing!

They do still exist, as well as older samples. I would accept any statically significant proof of pre-coloumbus DNA from any Bible lands in these peoples.