DNA Relevance

[SolarPowered]

Acts 2

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Does anyone else see the relevance of this verse with the DNA issue?

"DNA issue"? What "DNA issue"? It has been repeatedly shown by several folks who are active in DNA research that the DNA seen in the Americas in no way precludes arrival of Lehi's party 2,600 years ago. There is no "DNA issue", except in the minds of antis who continue to jaybear on this subject.

[The Dude]

The Dude:

Lehi left before the captivity in Babylon. What were the genetics of the of the Tribes of Israel and the indigenous population because of mixing? So we have little to no information on his genetics other than the name his Tribe.

What were the genetics of Lehis' wife? Unknown

What were the genetics of those that went with Lehi? Unknown

What were the genetics of the Jaredites? Unknown

And the list goes on and on like that.

So all we really have as far as genetics is concerned it is a bunch unknowns.

Utterly false. As I've said many times, we have this known: the genetics of today's Native Americans. Could the predominant patterns we see today in Native Americans have originated in any person living in the old world during Lehi's time? Absolutely, positively not.

Please keep in mind that the old world has huge diversity in DNA markers but in America there are only two main male lineages and five female lineages. Whether you look in Canada, Central America, or South America, it's always different proportions of the same few male/female lineages. All together, this picture tells us that the genetic landscape of America came from a few migrations (most scientists think two or three) that happened early in the human history of this hemisphere. In 600 BC there were vast civilizations in America, and we can safely say that today's American markers were also represented in those people -- if 30 or so colonists from Israel came along at that time, they would have made no impact on the gene pool already here, and they certainly wouldn't have spread throughout the hemisphere to actually dominate as we see today. It's genetically impossible.

And so I keep telling you, the questionable genetic character of 600BC israelites is a red herring, as far as scientific discussions of "lamanite" genetics.

(edit: the whole Cohen/Lemba example is part of this red herring. Critics and apologists alike have gone down a rabbit hole by arguing this example.)

So for Southerton, or anyone one else for that matter, to state the falsity of Mormon Scripture on the basis of unknowns is rather unscientific.

We can only state the falsity of certain interpretations of Mormon scripture. Southerton operated on the assumption that the traditional and predominant interpretation is the only one there is, and has since admitted that limited genetic models cannot be disproved by genetics.

[SolarPowered]

Zak,

During the New Testament days, there were Jews from all over the world who would come to the Temple to worship, they were able to maintain their Genetic footprint. Example: the Lemba tribe of Black Africans who are Jewish and can trace their lineage back to Soloman's time. Their DNA is Jewish, just like Jews all over the World. The DNA marker is fool proof.

This reminds me of the old saying that "As soon as you call something 'fool proof', they invent a better fool." To wit, that person to whom Zak's "BS" comment was addressed.

Since you are representing yourself as an expert in this field, they surely you already know that "The DNA marker" marks Cohanim DNA. No one in Lehi's party was a Cohen. Therefore, the Cohanim DNA marker is not expected in the Lamanite/Nephite population. Since you are representing that it should be there even with that knowledge, I am led to conclude things about you that would lead to my censure by the moderators if I were to write those conclusions here...

[katherine the great]

Acts 2

5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

Does anyone else see the relevance of this verse with the DNA issue?

No. I don't see it. What is it?

[katherine the great]

I of course am no authority on the question, but a possibility does seem to exist. One of the places on the list is ASIA. What we have is a verse in the bible that tells us that there were Jews from ASIA.

Sargon

The Asia of the Bible is Asia Minor (Turkey)--not the Far East.

[thesometimesaint]

The Dude:

Please state from the Book of Mormon where I have misstated the genetic contribution of the Lehites, and other groups mentioned in that Scripture.

For the record I have never believed in the Hemispheric Model for the Book of Mormon, and can not find any such statement in the canons of the Church. Though I know of some devout LDS who still believe it, to me the Hemispheric Model is nothing more than a misinterpretation of ancient writings that is now used as a Red Herring by critics of the Church.

I also, along with you, doubt that 30 plus or minus a few people of unknown genetic background would have much if any lasting impact on the much much larger contribution of the already existing resident population.

[thesometimesaint]

katherine the great:

It is also Asia proper.

[PacMan]

The Dude,

Southerton's conclusions don't rely on single samples of ancient DNA, but on modern samples taken from thousands of individuals. There are techical differences. Also, the questions are completely different. The mummy question is asking is this, or could this be, a particular historical individual?. The Book of Mormon question is asking (or should be asking) could these markers have originated in the time and place postulated by traditional interpretations of the BoM??

No. In this case it is reliable.

I messed up my post completely. The known bones are from her grandmother, and the association is trying to link these "newer" bones as Hatshepsut. That is the one generation of separation, which was still of concern for the scientists.

The facility you offered in answering my question which, albeit, made absolutely no sense...concerns me!

PacMan

[The Dude]

Hey TSS, when I said "utterly false" I was talking about this:

So all we really have as far as genetics is concerned it is a bunch unknowns.

We know lots of stuff and Southerton's conclusion about the Hemispheric model is right on target, contrary to what you said:

So for Southerton, or anyone one else for that matter, to state the falsity of Mormon Scripture on the basis of unknowns is rather unscientific.

An interpretation of Mormon scripture is false based on knowns.

Another interpretation, a limited view, cannot be shown false because genetics doesn't work that way (again, not because of unknowns).

Though I know of some devout LDS who still believe it, to me the Hemispheric Model is nothing more than a misinterpretation of ancient writings that is now used as a Red Herring by critics of the Church.

Joseph Smith believed it. He had no other hypothesis for how the americas came to be inhabited by humans after the great flood.

But these days, I think it is only reasonable to reject that model and go with something else. Whether you also reject JS is your business, and I am in no place to judge that, scientifically or otherwise.

[livy111us]

FAIR will be releasing a video on DNA and The Book of Mormon this upcoming FAIR conference. It will address the questions and red herrings brought up by the Dude and others.

[katherine the great]

katherine the great:

It is also Asia proper.

Including China, Mongolia and Siberia? As far as I know, the Biblical world didn't go any further east than modern day Iran.

[Zakuska]

Not so fast miss Great... Heres a few more veres that play into all of this...

Esther 2

5

[Garry T]

Zak,

"Do we see iny Jewish DNA in India today?" Gosh Zak, I don't know, but I think there probably is, there is Jewish DNA in Africa. Now wouldn't it make sense that Jewish DNA could be almost every where, except pre-Colombus America?

[SolarPowered]

Zak,

"Do we see iny Jewish DNA in India today?" Gosh Zak, I don't know, but I think there probably is, there is Jewish DNA in Africa. Now wouldn't it make sense that Jewish DNA could be almost every where, except pre-Colombus America?

Call For References: Define "Jewish DNA", and document where it has been fouund "almost every where."

I know of "Cohanim DNA', which one would not expect to find in Lehi's party; I know of no "Jewish DNA." Please document what "Jewish DNA" is, and what studies have found it where.

[Garry T]

Hello SP,

I know very little about DNA. But I do know that reputable scolarship has found no Jewish (Israelite) DNA in pre Columbus American Indians. It stands to reason that if you find a person of Israelite heritage living in Calcutta India, you would find Hebrew DNA. Now doesn't that make sense? Now SP, can you define DNA of any kind? That's like asking me can I define air.

[SolarPowered]

Hello SP,

I know very little about DNA. But I do know that reputable scolarship has found no Jewish (Israelite) DNA in pre Columbus American Indians. It stands to reason that if you find a person of Israelite heritage living in Calcutta India, you would find Hebrew DNA. Now doesn't that make sense? Now SP, can you define DNA of any kind? That's like asking me can I define air.

OK! I'll attempt to be nice for a change, and explain.

I believe what you are calling "Jewish (Israelite) DNA", and earlier called "the DNA marker", is what is known as the "Cohanim DNA marker." This is a specific DNA sequence found on the Y chromosome of males who are descended from Aaron, the brother of Moses. These descendants of Aaron, who are called by the name "Cohen", are the rightful holders of the Aaronic priesthood. This sequence has indeed been used to identify the Lemba tribe in africa, and also a group in India, as being of Israelite origin.

Other than the "Cohanim DNA marker", I am not aware of any specific DNA marker that identifies anyone as Jewish or Israelite. If you know of such a thing, please share this information with us. If you don't know of such a thing, then the Board rules are that you not continue to assert as true something for which you have no evidence.

This relates to the Book of Mormon as follows. No one in Lehi's party is purported to be a descendant of Aaron. Therefore, there is no reason to expect the Cohanim DNA marker to be present in a population that is descended from Lehi's party.

[katherine the great]

We are talking Jews from India to Ethiopia. And who are all these "People of the Land" who all of a sudden became Jews. Did their DNA all of a sudden change? Of course not... but now we have just brodened the Haployd (sp) group of possible hits we are looking for.

Do we see any "Jewish" DNA in India today?

Indians look like Lamanites to me!!!

Okay, so you are now talking about the scattered Jews of the Persian empire?

Your first post referred to a New Testament scripture about Jews visiting Jerusalem from settlements all over the known world.

[livy111us]

Only about 2% of Jews have the Cohan marker, and about 3% of non-Jews have the marker as well. It is not the most reliable way to prove Jewish lineage.

[caudicus]

20 generations back, an individual will have over 1 million ancestors. Were there not interconnections on genealogical lines, 80 generations (back to Lehi) by a very conservative count, ancestors would number in the quadrillions.

Charity, I hate to break it to you, but there is no way anyone can have a quadrillion ancestors, since that many people, including those living today, still only number in the billions (9 zeros vs 24 zeros). You might want to revisit your statistical analysis.

[Zakuska]

Timing Katherine... How many Persian Jews moved back to Jerusalem and where living at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost?

[cdowis]

Utterly false.

I find your absolute confidence interesting, if not amusing.

As I've said many times, we have this known: the genetics of today's Native Americans.

And what is the percent of the DNA pool from the BOM time period which survived in "today's Native Americans"? I suggest that you browse the book, "1491". Most of the Native American tribes have been extinct for several centuries.

Do you pretend that we have representative samples of all DNA from the BOM time period? The fact, despite your constant repetitions is that we do not have representative samples of all DNA from that time period.

We do NOT know all of the DNA that was among all the populations in the ancient Americas, and I have repeated that many times.

But I am interested in your response.

Here is some space to make your rebuttal:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Could the predominant patterns we see today in Native Americans have originated in any person living in the old world during Lehi's time? Absolutely, positively not.

Here is some more space to confirm your absurd statement. Give us proof, sirrah, not continued assertions.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please keep in mind that the old world has huge diversity in DNA markers but in America there are only two main male lineages and five female lineages.

Please prove your statement, sirrah. Here is more space. Give us the DNA characteristics of ALL ancient inhabitants of America, and give us your source.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[The Dude]

cdowis,

I'm confused, not amused, that you think we need to fight and disagree! Take your gloves off and re-read the post you are responding to. I said something like this:

An interpretation of Mormon scripture is false based on knowns.

If you'd been following me, you would know that I'm talking here about the hemispheric interpretation of the BoM. Our ignorance as to the full picture of pre-columbian genetics is not a problem for the absolute conclusion I stated, because so-called "hemispheric" interpretations predict that even in the 5-10% who survived the mass die-offs we would not find the sort of markers we actually do find. (Yes, I've read 1491.)

Is this clear?

I then said,

Another interpretation, a limited view, cannot be shown false because genetics doesn't work that way (again, not because of unknowns).

I don't quite remember, but I'd bet you believe a more limited view of BoM populations, like thesometimessaint. Such an interpretation cannot be shown false, and one of the reasons for this is the issue you have raised about die-offs from disease. The dynamics of population genetics do not lead to a falsifiable prediction in this case, in contrast to the hemispheric interpretations. Yeah, there's also the problem of not knowing what the "Jewish" markers would look like... which seems to be the thing people are most interested in discussing, even though it's really beside the point.

So basically, I don't see where we disagree.

[cdowis]

If you'd been following me, you would know that I'm talking here about the hemispheric interpretation of the BoM.

OK

Our ignorance as to the full picture of pre-columbian genetics is not a problem for the absolute conclusion I stated, because so-called "hemispheric" interpretations predict that even in the 5-10% who survived the mass die-offs we would not find the sort of markers we actually do find. (Yes, I've read 1491.)

Is this clear?

Not really.

I have read your statement several times, and, if I understand what you are saying, you are assuming that the model claims that the entire population be homogenous. The 5-10% represents the total gene pool in America.

I do not see that assumption under the hemispheric model at all. The model allows clusters of differing gene pools, of which one or two survived after 1491.

I then said,

I don't quite remember, but I'd bet you believe a more limited view of BoM populations, like thesometimessaint. Such an interpretation cannot be shown false, and one of the reasons for this is the issue you have raised about die-offs from disease. The dynamics of population genetics do not lead to a falsifiable prediction in this case, in contrast to the hemispheric interpretations. Yeah, there's also the problem of not knowing what the "Jewish" markers would look like... which seems to be the thing people are most interested in discussing, even though it's really beside the point.

The antimormons are comparing *modern* amerindians with *modern* Jews. Amerindians post 1491 with postexilic jews.

So basically, I don't see where we disagree.

Hopefully the issues are clear and we are in agreement.

[katherine the great]

Timing Katherine... How many Persian Jews moved back to Jerusalem and where living at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost?

I have no idea. What is the link you are trying to establish?

[California]

Sure, Lehi could have had Asian-looking DNA, but not of the specific type found in America. The markers here occur in clusters that indicate an arrival predating the birth of Moses by thousands of years (~10,000 years ago or more). Lehi's DNA could have had some of the same markers, sure, but it couldn't have been within the American clusters unless you argue that very ancient Americans traveled back to Israel and became Lehi's forefathers.

We don't know where Sariah was from, let's remember, and she may well have been Asian. Lehi was a rich travelling merchant. Also, we don't know how many other groups of people came from other parts of the world other than the Nephites and Jaredites etc. I think that to assume that it has to be Lehi's DNA is negating the possibility and I would say the definite reality that other groups must have come and mingled their DNA with the groups who were already here. How do we know that the groups who came weren't Asian and came and slaughtered the natives here and there? Maybe a few times, taking over their DNA.