The DNA Issue again.

[Rajah Manchou]

2 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Where in the text does it day they traveled through the land of Zarahemla?  It says they found a land and “supposed it to be the land of Zarahemla,” which seems to be saying that they were mistaken in that supposition.

I don’t see anything in the text to indicate that they “had to travel through the land of Zarahemla.”  

I see no other way to walk from Nephi to Desolation other than through Zarahemla. 

[ksfisher]

3 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I see no other way to walk from Nephi to Desolation other than through Zarahemla. 

This is not a map of the real world.  I suggest you look at some of the maps in works by Sorensen or Gardner.  Also this from Larry Poulsen is a good basis for discussion http://www.webring.org/l/rd?ring=mormonsites;id=2;url=http%3A%2F%2Fbomgeography.poulsenll.org%2F

[RevTestament]

On 6/14/2018 at 7:26 AM, Rajah Manchou said:

source

mtDNA mutations which survive occur somewhat slowly. On average a mutation occurs once every 2000 years although mutations seem to occur faster in some places. This would put the common X2a ancestor around 8000 BC, just a little older than the age of Kennewick man. So what we would look for to find a possible BoM connection is a mtDNA with about one mutation branch - or maybe even none. This makes excluding mtDNA results on the basis of modern(post-Columbian) admixture a bit of an issue. This is why I was making an issue of excluding BoM claims based on ancient mtDNA. Here is another big hint: male yDNA mutates much faster.

[Rajah Manchou]

1 minute ago, ksfisher said:

This is not a map of the real world.  I suggest you look at some of the maps in works by Sorensen or Gardner.  Also this from Larry Poulsen is a good basis for discussion http://www.webring.org/l/rd?ring=mormonsites;id=2;url=http%3A%2F%2Fbomgeography.poulsenll.org%2F

I have. I've looked at pretty much every attempt to make the Book of Mormon map fit in the real world. None of them fit without major contortions. So I guess we won't reach a conclusion here.

[RevTestament]

15 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

I see no other way to walk from Nephi to Desolation other than through Zarahemla. 

JFYI, I don't believe the "land of Zarahemla" was very big. I actually believe it was between 2 branches of the Sidon - we're talking a few miles long. When the Nephites went looking for Zarahemla and didn't find it, I think they went by it. They missed it, and went NE of it where they found the land of bones. That doesn't seem to agree with your assessment that they had to go through Zarahemla.

[Rajah Manchou]

5 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

JFYI, I don't believe the "land of Zarahemla" was very big. I actually believe it was between 2 branches of the Sidon - we're talking a few miles long. When the Nephites went looking for Zarahemla and didn't find it, I think they went by it. They missed it, and went NE of it where they found the land of bones. That doesn't seem to agree with your assessment that they had to go through Zarahemla.

It is certain Limhi's party didn't find the People of Zarahemla, the question we are trying to answer is: were there others in and around Zarahemela? 

I think no, there were not others. I do not imagine Limhi's party could have traveled so far through the heartland of the Book of Mormon narrative and return with nothing but the rusted swords and golden plates of the Jaredites. If there were others in the land (eg. the Maya) Limhi's party would have encountered them, and they would have not made the error in assuming that Zarahemla had been destroyed.

There is nothing in the text to suggest that Limhi's Party encountered others between the Land of Nephi and Desolation. The only reason to assume there were others in the land is to make Mesoamerica fit the text. There's really no other reason to make the assumption.

[RevTestament]

18 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

It is certain Limhi's party didn't find the People of Zarahemla, the question we are trying to answer is: were there others in and around Zarahemela? 

I think no, there were not others. I do not imagine Limhi's party could have traveled so far through the heartland of the Book of Mormon narrative and return with nothing but the rusted swords and golden plates of the Jaredites. If there were others in the land (eg. the Maya) Limhi's party would have encountered them, and they would have not made the error in assuming that Zarahemla had been destroyed.

There is nothing in the text to suggest that Limhi's Party encountered others between the Land of Nephi and Desolation. The only reason to assume there were others in the land is to make Mesoamerica fit the text. There's really no other reason to make the assumption.

Just to be clear, I think you know I do not favor a Mesoamerican setting. The Lord was supposed to send the Nephites to a land secreted or unknown to other nations. I find it difficult to make Mesoamerica fit this description. There were the Olmec, the early Maya, and other nations there which would have known of their presence, and presumably placed their small society in mortal danger. I don't believe there was land anywhere on earth at the time which was completely uninhabited except for small islands, but there were places which had no nations to threaten them. There were places where only a few hunter-gatherer families lived. I believe the Nephites landed at such a place. The coasts were more inhabited, but the Nephites traveled inland, while presumably the Lamanites chose to stay behind for awhile, although they must have tracked the Nephites inland at least a ways. What did the Lamanites do in the mean time? Had some children presumably. What if these kids were mostly boys? How did they grow more numerous than the Nephites who seemed to start with just as many or more people? There is just a lot we don't know, but I seem to be with you - I don't favor a Mesoamerican setting. I certainly am not going to force it to make the text fit. I don't think it fits textually at all for a lot of reasons.

Were there others in or around Zarahemla at the time? The text certainly doesn't describe any, but after a few hundred years, one could extrapolate a sizable population of thousands. In hunter-gatherer and even farming communities, that many people will be spread out in order to fish and hunt. Nevertheless, I believe the original land of Nephi was hundreds of miles from Zarahemla(about 400), and Zarahemla would be fairly easy to miss with even a few degrees difference in travel over that distance. 

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Can you call any part of this conclusion result of scientific (observation)?

 

It's quite generous of you to disagree with a study that supports your position.

[Atheist Mormon]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

It's quite generous of you to disagree with a study that supports your position.

Not really......I disagree with many theories like "Flat Earth" "Abductions by Aliens", a supreme deity, who is neither (ever) here or there.....you name it.  I prefer theories possibly to be falsified or substantiated by observation......

Edited June 16, 2018 by Atheist Mormon

[mfbukowski]

37 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Not really......I disagree with many theories like "Flat Earth" "Abductions by Aliens", a supreme deity, who is neither (ever) here or there.....you name it.  I prefer theories possibly to be falsified or substantiated by observation......

It seems you do not understand the argument. It is a REVIEW of scientific literature based upon examinations of Gene pools resulting in the conclusion that there is NO Hebrew DNA in the New World.

Using observation the study falsifies the notion that there is Hebrew DNA in the New World.

And you are arguing against that principle based on your belief that the study is not based on science?

You need to read it again.

Have a cup of coffee first.

 

 

Edited June 16, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Rajah Manchou]

On 6/12/2018 at 2:02 AM, aussieguy55 said:

"It is of course possible that genetic evidence of an ancient trans-Atlantic migration event simply has not been found yet. Should credible evidence of direct gene flow from an ancient Solutrean (or Middle Eastern) population be found within ancient Native American genomes, it would require the field to reassess the “Beringian only” model of prehistoric Native American migration. However, no such evidence has been found, and the Beringian migration model remains the best interpretation of the genetic, archaeological, and paleoclimate data to date."

What does the Beringian migration model say? It is important to keep up with the data, which is expanding with new ancient DNA results being published almost daily. For example:

"In the most detailed genetic analysis thus far, for example, Reich and colleagues identified three sources of Native American ancestry:

(1) A ‘First American’ stream contributing to all Native populations,
(2) A second stream contributing only to Eskimo-Aleut-speaking Arctic populations, and
(3) A third stream contributing only to a Na-Dene-speaking North American population. 

Please reread #3. It is important to acknowledge #3. 

There is more detail on these 2nd and 3rd waves in this paper:

"All methods detected Central and West Siberian ancestry exclusively in a fraction of modern day Na-Dene individuals, but not in other Native Americans. Our results are consistent with gene flow from Paleo-Eskimos into the First American ancestors of Na-Dene."

When did this admixture of Western Siberians and Na Dene (eg Navajo) take place? Please read this carefully:

(1) The first major migration started about 16,000 YBP and rapidly spread across North and South America. We refer to the descendants of this migration as First Americans.
(2) The second, Paleo-Eskimo, migration...took place about 4,800 YBP, long after the Bering land bridge had been inundated

It occurred 4800 years ago, roughly 2782 BC. There is genetic evidence of a Western Eurasian migration after the land bridge was flooded in the Navajo of Arizona. That admixture event would have occurred at precisely the same time as the Jaredite migration.

Nobody talks about this.

[RevTestament]

56 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

What does the Beringian migration model say? It is important to keep up with the data, which is expanding with new ancient DNA results being published almost daily. For example:

"In the most detailed genetic analysis thus far, for example, Reich and colleagues identified three sources of Native American ancestry:

(1) A ‘First American’ stream contributing to all Native populations,
(2) A second stream contributing only to Eskimo-Aleut-speaking Arctic populations, and
(3) A third stream contributing only to a Na-Dene-speaking North American population. 

Please reread #3. It is important to acknowledge #3. 

There is more detail on these 2nd and 3rd waves in this paper:

"All methods detected Central and West Siberian ancestry exclusively in a fraction of modern day Na-Dene individuals, but not in other Native Americans. Our results are consistent with gene flow from Paleo-Eskimos into the First American ancestors of Na-Dene."

When did this admixture of Western Siberians and Na Dene (eg Navajo) take place? Please read this carefully:

(1) The first major migration started about 16,000 YBP and rapidly spread across North and South America. We refer to the descendants of this migration as First Americans.
(2) The second, Paleo-Eskimo, migration...took place about 4,800 YBP, long after the Bering land bridge had been inundated

It occurred 4800 years ago, roughly 2782 BC. There is genetic evidence of a Western Eurasian migration after the land bridge was flooded in the Navajo of Arizona. That admixture event would have occurred at precisely the same time as the Jaredite migration.

Nobody talks about this.

No. Scholars love that Beringian Land Bridge theory which has fallen into some dispute - even at the Smithsonian. 

I personally see evidence for other populations as well. I have little doubt that Polynesians found their way to S. America. They found a speck of land 2000 miles away (Easter Island). How many missed that and found the impenetrable barrier of S. America? They were just a small group like the Lehites, so their genetic record got swallowed up. I think some Africans also made it, but if African DNA is found in local populations it is always attributed to post-Columbian admixture. Same story again and again. I think a lot of scholars now discount the Beringian Land Bridge theory as being the only valid theory. In fact many now doubt there was an open land bridge at the supposed time of the immigration.

[Rajah Manchou]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

No. Scholars love that Beringian Land Bridge theory which has fallen into some dispute - even at the Smithsonian....I think a lot of scholars now discount the Beringian Land Bridge theory as being the only valid theory. In fact many now doubt there was an open land bridge at the supposed time of the immigration.

Just seeing this in the wiki for Haplogroup Q-M242:

Q-M242 is the predominant Y-DNA haplogroup among Native Americans and several peoples of Central Asia and Northern Siberia. It is also the predominant Y-DNA of the Akha tribe in northern Thailand and the Dayak people of Indonesia. Several branches of haplogroup Q-M242 have been predominant pre-Columbian male lineages in indigenous peoples of the Americas. Most of them are descendants of the major founding groups who migrated from Asia into the Americas by crossing the Bering Strait. These small groups of founders must have included men from the Q-M346, Q-L54, Q-Z780, and Q-M3 lineages. In the North America, two other Q-lineages also have been found. These are Q-P89.1 (under Q-MEH2) and Q-NWT01. They may have not been from the Beringia Crossings but instead come from later immigrants who traveled along the shoreline of Far East Asia and then the Americas using boats.

It is unclear whether the current frequency of Q-M242 lineages represents their frequency at the time of immigration or is the result of the shifts in a small founder population over time. Anyway, Q-M242 came to dominate the paternal lineages in the Americas.

In the indigenous people of North America, Q-M242 is found in Na-Dené speakers at an average rate of 68%. The highest frequency is 92.3% in Navajo, followed by 78.1% in Apache, 87% in SC Apache, and about 80% in North American Eskimo (Inuit)–Aleut populations. (Q-M3 occupies 46% among Q in North America)

As mentioned above the Na-Dene groups appear to have come in migrations (by boat) around 2700 BC.

What am I missing? Is this not evidence that there were migrations of Western Eurasian like groups into the Americas at the same time as the Jaredite migrations?

Edited June 17, 2018 by Rajah Manchou

[Atheist Mormon]

19 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

It seems you do not understand the argument. It is a REVIEW of scientific literature based upon examinations of Gene pools resulting in the conclusion that there is NO Hebrew DNA in the New World.

Using observation the study falsifies the notion that there is Hebrew DNA in the New World.

And you are arguing against that principle based on your belief that the study is not based on science?

You need to read it again.

Have a cup of coffee first.

 

 

Edited June 17, 2018 by Atheist Mormon

[aussieguy55]

If the Tower story is myth then there were no  Jaradites    https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/01-genesis/text/articles-books/seely_babel_wtj.htm

[clarkgoble]

38 minutes ago, aussieguy55 said:

If the Tower story is myth then there were no  Jaradites    https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/01-genesis/text/articles-books/seely_babel_wtj.htm

Isn’t that a false dichotomy? What if it were an oral tradition only written down around 800-700 BC and this inaccurate yet based in history. Moroni who is writing centuries after the Jaredites as a people ended summarizes those records in terms of the Genesis 11 passages in the form they took in the brass plates - likely different from the form we have in Genesis.

The “it’s completely accurate or completely myth/fiction” dichotomy always struck me as odd.

[Rajah Manchou]

51 minutes ago, aussieguy55 said:

If the Tower story is myth then there were no Jaradites

If you prefer to look at the tower and the Jaredites as myth, that's fine.
What I'm trying to resolve is: was there a migration of Western/Central Eurasians to America by boat around 4500 years ago? The studies I linked to above seem to support it.

[Thinking]

I'm not an expert on DNA, so I have to rely on what others write about it. One thing I do know is that prior to the DNA issue the word principal was in the Book of Mormon introduction. It has since been changed to among.

[aussieguy55]

Jaradites - 344 days driven by a strong wind?  Columbus took around  60 days.  Going to the bathroom in a sealed boat? Animal and human waste? 

[Rajah Manchou]

Just now, aussieguy55 said:

Jaradites - 344 days driven by a strong wind?  Columbus took around  60 days.  Going to the bathroom in a sealed boat? Animal and human waste? 

You're right that certainly sounds impossible. But, was there a migration of Western/Central Eurasians to America by boat around 4500 years ago? 

[RevTestament]

18 minutes ago, aussieguy55 said:

Jaradites - 344 days driven by a strong wind?  Columbus took around  60 days.  Going to the bathroom in a sealed boat? Animal and human waste? 

My take on this story is that the Jaredites drifted on the main ocean current of the Atlantic. The equatorial current is kinda slow(1.5 mph). However, they certainly could have drifted to the Americas in 344 days. If you notice the text says they only sealed the boat when the waters came in ie during storms. The bottom could be opened too. At first I thought this a stupid design, but some boats have such moon pools, although I think it obvious the Jaredite ones would be smaller. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_pool This would allow a way to eliminate waste even in rough seas. They could kill resting birds when near land, and fish. They probably could collect flying fish from their decks as well.

[aussieguy55]

If as Peter Enns and William Dever  and Israel Finkelstein argue much of the Books of Moses is myth.No Tower of Babel no Jaradites.  If no historical Adam then no problems with Adam God teaching.

https://biologos.org/blogs/archive/adam-and-eve-literal-or-literary

"If they are literal people, then the trove of evolutionary and DNA evidence can’t be right. It’s impossible for the human race to trace back to a single pair of parents (and this without mentioning a talking snake and God creating Adam out of the dirt and Eve from his rib). For the serious student of Scripture and science, making a choice between literal and literary is impossible too. Can’t there be a middle option?"

"To regard Adam and Eve as historical figures leaves us with basically two options within an evolutionary rubric. The first is that God created them supernaturally, midstream in evolution’s flow. To create in such a way would require that God also put in place a DNA history, since human origins genetically trace back to earlier, common ancestors. Conceptually, this presents the same problems as creating the universe with apparent age. Apparent age is how some square a literal Genesis with scientific evidence. Stars that appear to be billions of years old (according to cosmological measurements) are in reality only a few thousand years old (according to literal biblical reckoning). God created the stars with age."

 

 

Edited June 17, 2018 by aussieguy55
add information

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, aussieguy55 said:

If the Tower story is myth then there were no  Jaradites    https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/01-genesis/text/articles-books/seely_babel_wtj.htm

And the atonement?

If you know you are forgiven does it matter?

If God personally gives you comfort in your spirit that he loves you and you are forgiven who cares?

Who else is your judge?

Do we want to tell him how to run his business?

This is why all comes down to testimony. Either you have it or you don't.

Anything else is extraneous.

Edited June 17, 2018 by mfbukowski

[clarkgoble]

21 hours ago, aussieguy55 said:

If as Peter Enns and William Dever  and Israel Finkelstein argue much of the Books of Moses is myth.No Tower of Babel no Jaradites.  If no historical Adam then no problems with Adam God teaching.

Again a bit of a false dichotomy and most based upon an argument from silence. That is rather than simply see them as corrupted accounts with a ground in history they assume they're purely myth. That's completely understandable of course but not really much of an argument against Jaredites.

22 hours ago, aussieguy55 said:

Jaradites - 344 days driven by a strong wind?  Columbus took around  60 days.  Going to the bathroom in a sealed boat? Animal and human waste? 

I suspect they were only sealed in storms. Also we know the trip took that long according to Moroni but we don't know if they made stops during that time. (Most likely they did) In which case we're just talking about a typical polynesian craft with a part that was sealed for dealing with storms. The polynesians regularly crossed the pacific.

While quite speculative I wrote up one way to think about the Jaredites in terms of polynesian voyages. It's still miraculous they survived but shows a way that it's not a completely unfathomable miracle. I think it's incorrect to assume that they spent all of those 344 days in a sealed chamber. The text simply doesn't state that but suggests the chamber was primarily for storms.

Edited June 18, 2018 by clarkgoble

[Atheist Mormon]

On 6/16/2018 at 2:33 PM, mfbukowski said:

It seems you do not understand the argument. It is a REVIEW of scientific literature based upon examinations of Gene pools resulting in the conclusion that there is NO Hebrew DNA in the New World.

Using observation the study falsifies the notion that there is Hebrew DNA in the New World.

And you are arguing against that principle based on your belief that the study is not based on science?

You need to read it again.

Have a cup of coffee first.

 

 

You were right 😞 Bukowski. Sorry