Carving Of Precolumbian Horse At Chich

[ebeddoulos]

Since the decision has been made that the elephants of Copan are macaws, I thought I would share a few pictures of macaws from around the world.

[Rommelator]

Uh, yeah, you kinda did. Its ok though, I can take it.

Where? Where did I specifically call you an anti-Mormon? I mentioned that anti-Mormons in general do not like the phrase, but where did I single you out? CFR!

Non-LDS archeologists/scholars are not

You're right. Non-LDS archeaologists are not biased by LDS theology. But do you know what they are biased with? NON-LDS Theology.

I reasonably conclude that the non-LDS archeologist/scholar is not biased by Mormon theology.

Do you honestly think that Evangelical, Catholic, Hindu, Muslim, Atheist and Buddhist scholars are not biased from their theologies and world-views? What if you had an atheist Mesoamerican archaeologist who has already concluded that there is no God. Let's also say that said atheist has therefore already made up his mind that the Book of Mormon is false. Do you honest think that his investigations into Mesoamerica and his evaluation of the remains thereof is not going to be largely influence how he applys the data against the Book of Mormon?

The fact is that we all have biases. LDS, non-LDS, non-objectivity does not discriminate. As many have been quick to point out, objectivity is a myth. We all bring our biases into our investigations. Just look at the thread about Rough Stone Rolling or Joseph Smith's Seer Stone usage (or any other thread for that reason). I have heard stone cold atheists on this board comment that they are certain that Joseph Smith is a fraud, and, therefore, whenever they investigate his life, they surely bring that bias with them. The same goes for Latter-day Saints here who are certain he was telling the truth. That bias similarly sways how they investigate his life and come to their conclusions.

But seriously, good grief. I see your sophomoric smearing and well poisoning knows no bounds and your blatant double standard is happily employed.

[Bender]

Bernard Gui

Is there any other BoM reference

that would give one the idea that they were common, plentiful, prized, ridden?

Enos tell us that the raised many horses. I don't think using the word common or plentiful would be that inappropriate. Lehi's group said they found horses in the wilderness. I'm not sure why the word herd couldn't be used. The fact that they are mentioned a number of times in a primarily religious text, I would think would suggest that they were important, maybe even prized. Ridden? Who knows. I would also think Lehi's group would know that they could be ridden.

[Brant Gardner]

Since the decision has been made that the elephants of Copan are macaws, I thought I would share a few pictures of macaws from around the world.

There are 4 Mesoamerican examples (one a line drawing of the Copan stela to the left). That one is damaged enough that I don't recognize it. The third (line drawing) is very obviously a macaw. The fourth is a picture of a man dressed as a bat.

[phaedrus ut]

As a happy coincidence I noticed on the front page of the F.A.R.M.S. site today the FAQ is the horse question ...

Why has no evidence of horses been found in the Americas in Book of Mormon times?

It's nice to see they're still using the Florida horse bones as evidence after all these years.

Phaedrus

[SolarPowered]

It's nice to see they're still using the Florida horse bones as evidence after all these years.

Is there a problem with that?

[phaedrus ut]

Is there a problem with that?

Yeah lots. It's been discussed on here probably a dozen times. Here are a couple threads if you want to follow.

Where is the reference?

Equis Teeth

Florida Horse Teeth: 100BC

The Florida horse evidence cited by has long been thoroughly discredited. The original published results were from 46 years ago and the funny thing is Paul Martin, one of the original authors, uses that specific find as an example of bad science and bad dating. Here is Martin discussion the Florida find.

Not since the early years of 14C dating, when laboratory protocols for sample selection and pretreatment were not standardized or well understood by consumers of dates (see, e.g., Martin 1958 and Hester 1960), has anyone seriously advanced the thought that mammoths or mastodons survived into the mid-Holocene. Those North American Holocene dates of yore were not replicated and could not be supported stratigraphically and geochemically. They moulder in the graveyard of unverified measurements.[RADIOCARBON, VoL. 37, No. 1, 1995, P. 7-10]MAMMOTH EXTINCTION: TWO CONTINENTS AND WRANGEL ISLAND, PAUL S. MARTIN

Phaedrus

[MAsh]

jonzlaw, become acquainted with the debate.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_BMProb2.shtml#horses

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=129&am...ble=transcripts

http://en.fairmormon.org/Topical_Guide/Boo.../Animals/Horses

Last October I gave a presentation at the BoM Lands Conference on Horses in the BoM. I've updated the article for FAIR here:

http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/AshHorse/

Mike Ash

[Chris Smith]

That is certainly a rubbing from Chichen, but it isn't the one in question. There is no figure in that rubbing that corresponds to the figure in the carving.

Actually I think there is, but the frame previously suggested wasn't it. Sorry about that. See bottom row, frame 3.

[John Williams]

Actually I think there is, but the frame previously suggested wasn't it. Sorry about that. See bottom row, frame 3.

Yep, that looks like it, and it sure doesn't look like a horse in context.

[Sargon]

Last October I gave a presentation at the BoM Lands Conference on Horses in the BoM. I've updated the article for FAIR here:

http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/AshHorse/

Mike Ash

Goodness, someone needs to attach this to the FAIRwiki!

I'll do it.

James

[SolarPowered]

Yeah lots. It's been discussed on here probably a dozen times. Here are a couple threads if you want to follow.

Where is the reference?

Equis Teeth

Florida Horse Teeth: 100BC

There is a lot of pages of threads there. I skimmed them, and all I saw about the Florida dating was whining and complaining by detractors, but I didn't see any presentation of evidence refuting that dating. Perhaps you can point to a specific post that I missed?

The Florida horse evidence cited by has long been thoroughly discredited. The original published results were from 46 years ago and the funny thing is Paul Martin, one of the original authors, uses that specific find as an example of bad science and bad dating. Here is Martin discussion the Florida find.

Not since the early years of 14C dating, when laboratory protocols for sample selection and pretreatment were not standardized or well understood by consumers of dates (see, e.g., Martin 1958 and Hester 1960), has anyone seriously advanced the thought that mammoths or mastodons survived into the mid-Holocene. Those North American Holocene dates of yore were not replicated and could not be supported stratigraphically and geochemically. They moulder in the graveyard of unverified measurements.[RADIOCARBON, VoL. 37, No. 1, 1995, P. 7-10]MAMMOTH EXTINCTION: TWO CONTINENTS AND WRANGEL ISLAND, PAUL S. MARTIN

That quote appears to be talking about mammoths and mastodons, not horses.

[SolarPowered]

.

[Tarski]

There is a lot of pages of threads there. I skimmed them, and all I saw about the Florida dating was whining and complaining by detractors, but I didn't see any presentation of evidence refuting that dating. Perhaps you can point to a specific post that I missed?

Where is the dating? Where is it published and authenticated?????????????

Anybody can claim anything and then refuse to subject it to peer review and further testing and authentication. I have seen absolutely nothing but the silly (and old-) Hestor thing which has just become an archetype of bad procedure.

Where is it, so we can discuss it?

There is no there there.

[Brant Gardner]

Actually I think there is, but the frame previously suggested wasn't it. Sorry about that. See bottom row, frame 3.

Ah... yes, that is the one. However, there is even less visible detail on the rubbing. The head looks different from the obvious jaguars - so I guess I am back to dog (though it is larger than most pre-contact dogs).

[SolarPowered]

Ah... yes, that is the one. However, there is even less visible detail on the rubbing. The head looks different from the obvious jaguars - so I guess I am back to dog (though it is larger than most pre-contact dogs).

Mike Ash's article indicates that the ongoing FARMS research project to radiocarbon date horse remains is finding that precolumbian horses are significantly smaller than European horses--too small to ride.

I think it is quite plausible that the pictured animal is a precolumbian horse--it's certainly of about the right size.

[SolarPowered]

Where is the dating? Where is it published and authenticated?????????????

Anybody can claim anything and then refuse to subject it to peer review and further testing and authentication. I have seen absolutely nothing but the silly (and old-) Hestor thing which has just become an archetype of bad procedure.

Where is it, so we can discuss it?

There is no there there.

Yes, it is true that the note on the FARMS web site is not footnoted. To use your language, without further information, one can reasonably take the position that "there is no there there."

On the other hand, that is not a valid basis for phaedrus ut's assertion that the find "has long been thoroughly discredited."

[John Williams]

Mike Ash's article indicates that the ongoing FARMS research project to radiocarbon date horse remains is finding that precolumbian horses are significantly smaller than European horses--too small to ride.

I think it is quite plausible that the pictured animal is a precolumbian horse--it's certainly of about the right size.

This seems a much less certain statement than your earlier insistence that it most definitely is a horse. Are you saying that reserving judgment is no longer just an anti-Mormon pose?

[Sargon]

Last October I gave a presentation at the BoM Lands Conference on Horses in the BoM. I've updated the article for FAIR here:

http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/AshHorse/

Mike Ash

This is possibly the best article I have read on the subject. It combines all of the aspects of the debate into one great essay, providing ample examples and strong reasoning. Job well done.

James

[phaedrus ut]

That quote appears to be talking about mammoths and mastodons, not horses.

I thought I was pretty clear what that was regarding. The Florida horse find has been discredited. In fact it's been used as an example of bad science by it's original author. So in the article about mammoths and mastodons Paul Martin refers back to his earlier work and holds it up as a example of bad dating in the early years of 14C dating. That's the citation above.

So yes his 40+ year old work is being cited by LDS apologists as evidence for horses in America and by the author as an example of previous errors.

Phaedrus

[phaedrus ut]

Tarski,

It seems like I recall that you were emailing FARMS on this Florida horse thing years ago. And IIRC you had pointed out to someone how dubious the "evidence" is. Is that right?

Phaedrus

[Tarski]

Mike Ash's article indicates that the ongoing FARMS research project to radiocarbon date horse remains is finding that precolumbian horses are significantly smaller than European horses--too small to ride.

Somehow the picture is getting less grand all the time. Smaller region, smaller horses (tapirs?), steel swords that are really just wooden clubs.

Arnold Friberg would have been decidedly less inspired. I know I am.

[cksalmon]

Actually I think there is, but the frame previously suggested wasn't it. Sorry about that. See bottom row, frame 3.

Great catch, Chris. It's dead on.

[Tarski]

Tarski,

It seems like I recall that you were emailing FARMS on this Florida horse thing years ago. And IIRC you had pointed out to someone how dubious the "evidence" is. Is that right?

Phaedrus

Yes. It is still totally dubious. No backup was given and it remains on the same site.

Pages are written about horses in the BoM but it never amounts to anything. Cash value =0

[SolarPowered]

This seems a much less certain statement than your earlier insistence that it most definitely is a horse. Are you saying that reserving judgment is no longer just an anti-Mormon pose?

Nope. No change. My statement in post #7 of this thread was:

It's a horse. At the very least, it's an animal that your "reasonable Nephite" could reasonably have called a "horse."