BoM Geography: The Gloves are Off...

[Gervin]

The problem is what you are focusing on in Mormon 6:6.

The relevant part is:

therefore I [Mormon] made this record out of the plates of Nephi, and

hid up in the hill Cumorah all the records

which had been entrusted to me by the hand of the Lord, save it were

these few plates which I gave unto my son Moroni

.

Mormon 6:6 talks about two different sets of records: one set that was buried in Mormon's hill Cumorah and another set that was given to Moroni.

The text under the picture on the Church website says

In A.D. 421, Moroni buried a set of gold plates in the Hill Cumorah containing the sacred history of his people

The "Hill Cumorah" on the web page is talking about hill in the photo, which is named "Hill Cumorah" and which is where the Moroni plates were hidden. The pointer to Mormon 6:6 is pointing us to the reference to the plates that were given to Moroni, not the plates that were hidden by Mormon in his "hill Cumorah" where the battle took place.

At least that is how it could easily be read.

I was focusinng on Mormon 6:6 because the picture provided a link to Mormon 6:6. And you call this a problem on my part? In a photo under "Church History Sites" the hill Cumorah is shown with a reference to 6:6 that also mentions the hill Cumorah and the reader should know that the hill in the picture is not the hill in the verse? Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? Why didn't they just reference 8:4?

[annoyed]

1. No where in North America were there was domesticated animals and agriculture to keep up with the large populations reported from the Book of Mormon except in Mesoamerica. All else were hunter gatherers during the time of the Book of Mormon.

Maybe those numbers were metaphorical.

2. Nowhere in North America except Mesoamerica had a writing system

3. No where in North America do the timelines of the indigenous people match up exactly with the Book of Mormon except in Mesoamerica (Mayans with the Nephites and Olmecs with the Jaredites).

Actually the Algonguins match nicely, and yes, they did have a written language called Micmac.

4. Joseph Feilding Smith said in 1956;

[Paul McNabb]

I was focusinng on Mormon 6:6 because the picture provided a link to Mormon 6:6. And you call this a problem on my part? In a photo under "Church History Sites" the hill Cumorah is shown with a reference to 6:6 that also mentions the hill Cumorah and the reader should know that the hill in the picture is not the hill in the verse? Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? Why didn't they just reference 8:4?

Sorry. I meant "you" in a generic sense of "the reader."

Yes, it is a problem. Not all people believe the two Cumorah notion. In fact, I'm guessing a majority of members have probably never heard of it. So most readers will simply assume the BoM text and the picture's caption are saying what the reader already believes and they will never consider that there may be other ways of reading the text.

But since BoM geography and the location of Mormon's Cumorah are pretty unimportant in the overall scheme of things, I doubt much damage is done. The only problem comes when people become rigid and dogmatic about these kinds of things and start arguing that a certain interpretation MUST be accepted as true or else the entire Book of Mormon true claim falls apart. When people start claiming that their view of the BoM geography MUST be adopted to remain faithful to Joseph Smith and the Church, that's when the problems start.

[annoyed]

Now you've slipped into spin mode. We can always find specific buildings that took a long time to build. ..Any geography model that supposes the Nephites built large stone temples and other buildings along the lines of what is found in Greek, Roman, Egyptian, and Mesoamerican architecture only needs to have the Nephites spending several years doing so. If your model proposes a building style like that of medieval cathedrals, then you will need to allow at least a generation and probably more.

Had there been exceptional craftsmanship in stone, whether structurally or ornately, it would have been mentioned. We have long lists of accomplishments, but stone is not one of them. Had the Nephites or Lamanites been the builders of those stone temples and cities, it would have been noted, just as visitors today always note how impressive they are.

Me, too, except that I don't claim to know the secret, unwritten thoughts and dreams of the Nephites.

Are you in another thread, or confused? I identified a specific place, with fulfilled prophecies, and you refuse to identify a piece of land or demonstrate specifically how they were fulfilled on THAT LAND. Wake up and stop obfuscating.

Well, those are some of Nibley's thoughts on the matter. He could well have been right. Then again, Nibley constantly repeated that his ideas were not fixed and that he could be wrong. He understood that he was putting together a possible interpretation of the text. That is part of the reason why Nibley was a scholar and not a fanatic.

I don't appreciate the implication, just because I defend what the book says, and give a statement by Nibley confirming the same. You should have respected the book in the first place!

No, much sillier. The argument for proving a non-Mesoamerica model based on wood/stone is one where every element and assumption of the argument is false.

Your obfuscating is getting old. You side-tracked into wood, not I. The spiritual geography was MY point, which YES, I do use to prove a model, and you have not.

Name the specific land, with what specific prophecies were fulfilled on that land.

If you have a theory, put it out and let's look at it.

You apparantly have no interest, yet know enough to argue, yet won't committ to a model, yet claim to know more than others, yet run at a challenge to demonstrate your handle of the geography. I'll ask again, demonstrate your ability to interpret verse objectively.

Where is the City of Bountiful located?

[annoyed]

As a matter of fact, he doesn't need to say it, Mormon does.

So, where was he? In the land of Cumorah, which land does not necessarily correlate with the hill Joseph found the plates in. But what did he put there? All the records which had been entrusted to him except the plates! Those plates he gave to his son Moroni. Note the date in verse 5:

I agree.

You both missed the mark.

Before the war he had deposited "all the records...in Cumorah."

David, Joseph, Oliver and others said both depositories WERE IN CUMORAH.

Note the date in verse 5:

Note the date in Moroni 10:1 as Moroni prepares to end and presumably bury the plates: 420 - 384 = 36 years, maybe more, since Moroni was given the plates. Long enough to travel quite a ways.

You're allowing presentism to skew your view. You know he lived that long, but he did not know that he would. By all accounts, he lived one day at a time, not knowing if the next would be his last.

[Paul McNabb]

Had there been exceptional craftsmanship in stone, whether structurally or ornately, it would have been mentioned. We have long lists of accomplishments, but stone is not one of them. Had the Nephites or Lamanites been the builders of those stone temples and cities, it would have been noted, just as visitors today always note how impressive they are.

Maybe, maybe not. You are now arguing that the lack of comments about working in stone means or implies that they did not work in stone. The lack of explicit mentions of stone buildings is a minor negative for those who advocate stone buildings. But I don't know what you mean by "those stone temples and cities" I don't remember advocating any particular temple or city, just that the Book of Mormon doesn't preclude stone temples or cities.

Are you in another thread, or confused? I identified a specific place, with fulfilled prophecies, and you refuse to identify a piece of land or demonstrate specifically how they were fulfilled on THAT LAND. Wake up and stop obfuscating.

Please stay on topic. I was responding to your earlier statement where you said, "I'm glad my mind is not stuck in Mesoamerica, with illusions of grander the Nephites rarely had." I'm curious to know how you have become aware of the ancient illusions of the Nephites, particularly those they rarely had. You seemed to be saying that someone today is thinking something that the ancient Nephites didn't think, and such an odd claim is not something I wish to make. That's all.

I don't appreciate the implication, just because I defend what the book says, and give a statement by Nibley confirming the same. You should have respected the book in the first place!

I did not mean to imply that you were a fanatic, and I certainly didn't say that. I only meant that Nibley's words carry some weight but that he was not insistent on that point of view.

Your obfuscating is getting old. You side-tracked into wood, not I. The spiritual geography was MY point, which YES, I do use to prove a model, and you have not.

All this wood/stone bit started with YOU, not me. Please reread your post #78 where you introduced the topic. YOU were the one that started claiming that the text of the Book of Mormon taught that Noah used wood and not stone, and it was YOU that asserted that Noah didn't have time to build stone buildings. Your argument has been thoroughly and completely trashed. You haven't event TRIED to respond except to bring up the SL Temple red herring.

All of your attempts to ignore the collapse of your Noah argument and to move onto "spiritual geography" and the location of Bountiful is just your tactic to slip away into a discussion you would prefer to have but which I have said little interests me. Please don't berate me because I am staying on topic and don't have a firm opinion about things that seem to excite your passion.

Name the specific land, with what specific prophecies were fulfilled on that land.

I'm not aware of any specific prophecies that seem relevant to the discussion of Book of Mormon geography. I've asked you to tell me, but you merely shout back in size 5 type. I've asked you before and I'll ask it again. Just what are those prophecies that you think comprise the "spiritual geography" of the Book of Mormon?

You apparantly have no interest, yet know enough to argue, yet won't committ to a model, yet claim to know more than others, yet run at a challenge to demonstrate your handle of the geography. I'll ask again, demonstrate your ability to interpret verse objectively.

Where is the City of Bountiful located?

I do indeed have little interest in promoting any specific geography, though I have said that I tend towards one of the Mesoamerican ones, maybe Sorenson. I know enough to discuss ancient stone buildings. I won't commit to a model because I don't have a passion for that issue and I haven't seen anything compelling on any side. I have never claimed to know more than others---you are now just getting insulting. I have never claimed to have any special talent in the geography area, just that I can reason from texts when I put some time into it. As for Bountiful, I can truthfully say that I haven't the slightest idea at all, and I can't tell you where ANYONE claims the city was without going online and looking up what they've written about it. I can't even tell you where Sorenson said it might be without getting out his book and looking it up.

So if you want to propose a geography, please do so. I find it increasingly odd that you are dancing around this whole thing. Please stop being coy and just tell me what you believe and why. Then we can discuss it if it looks interesting to me.

[SlackTime]

You both missed the mark.

Before the war he had deposited "all the records...in Cumorah."

David, Joseph, Oliver and others said both depositories WERE IN CUMORAH.

Sorry, whatever size you make it, doesn't matter, the scripture says he deposited everything

except the plates.

You're allowing presentism to skew your view. You know he lived that long, but he did not know that he would. By all accounts, he lived one day at a time, not knowing if the next would be his last.

No presentism at all, you allow your skewed insistence on a geography that is not accepted by the Church, and that does not match the details of the Book of Mormon, to drive your need for anything to back you up. You look "beyond the mark". Of course you aren't alone. So does Meldrum.

- SlackTime

[Anijen]

Annoyed;

Maybe those numbers were metaphorical.

My guess is they were liken to a Centurion in charge of a hundred men but that more than likely could be anywhere from 60-85 at any given time. I doubt they were as high as the BoM claims, but I do not believe them to be metaphorical. It is interesting that you have played the metaphor card here because it is the only way a western New York theory would fit into the BoM.

Actually the Algonguins match nicely, and yes, they did have a written language called Micmac.

CFR on the Algonquin matching nicely. I admit I am not up to par on the Algonquin history, so I went to my books and did some reading, then I went to the internet and did some more studying. No where could I find a timeline that matches with the BoM. The Oldest statement I could find was 2000 years ago. Which is late for the BoM by about 600 years. Their population numbers do not even come close. The largest population group of Algonquin I could find was 8000, which is not even close to the numbers in the Book of Mormon, in which do I need mention does happen to match in Mesoamerica. As far as a written language I cannot find a single source which dates Mi'kmaq to Book of Mormon times, so once again provide me your source that places Mi'kmaq as a written language during the BOM time period.

The hemispheric mindset caused almost as much error as a single verse for malaria.

I have no idea what you mean here.

You ignore everything said.

Obviously I don't hence they way I am responding

Are you posting via email?

No

Why are you not reading the other posts?

I am and I even respond to some of them.

You give the lazy Lamanites too much credit

And you give them too little. Oh and BTW I do not consider them lazy.

nothing of the Nephites would remain.

Classic error. Those who follow this theory and its originators would like you to believe this.

nothing of the Nephites would remain.

Such an incompetent statement I had to repeat it. Ask any anthropologist any Archeologist and ask them if a civilization can be around for a thousand years and not have anything remain. It is impossible there will always be something left.

Coincidences will occur. Anti's take the same approach to disprove the BoM. You need to do better than that.

I am doing better than that.

Wrong. Beginning with Joseph the grander of S. America was irresistible not to claim his own. The LDS church followed the lead as one indulgent researcher after another claimed them as well. It wasn't until the lack of DNA evidence that such presumptuousness was stopped. NO LONGER do they claim ALL OF AMERICA, now just a tiny little area, and yet you continue to demand evidence of a GRAND SCALE. Evidence that mindset has not died.

There is so much in here that I could remark however if I did I'm afraid it would give more credence to your Western New York theory than its worth.

Now watch, Anijen won't be satisfied, just a guess, let's see.

Why should I be satisfied? Your ideas lack any substance, they are void of facts, are misrepresented, do not match hardly anything in the Book of Mormon,Your lack of sources are a joke and you conveniently hold to a nothing idea and FWIW is about worth the same.

However I am amused that you singled me out I must be striking a nerve.

[annoyed]

My guess is they were liken to a Centurion in charge of a hundred men but that more than likely could be anywhere from 60-85 at any given time. I doubt they were as high as the BoM claims, but I do not believe them to be metaphorical. It is interesting that you have played the metaphor card here because it is the only way a western New York theory would fit into the BoM.

The metaphorical card is a joke learned from Christensen who played it because he had no response.

CFR on the Algonquin matching nicely.

The understanding of Western New York is in its infancy. Prior researchers had a significant bias against the Book of Mormon. You'll need to buy Phyllis Carol Olive's new book "Lost Empires and Vanished Races" for further light.

Whereas the dating and history of Mesoamerica is now known, the mystery, well, there is no mystery at all - they're not BoM lands.

However I am amused that you singled me out I must be striking a nerve.

I singled you out because I knew I would get a response. Oh, and I think you'll come around.

.

[Anijen]

Annoyed

The understanding of Western New York is in its infancy. Prior researchers had a significant bias against the Book of Mormon. You'll need to buy Phyllis Carol Olive's new book "Lost Empires and Vanished Races" for further light.

Again I wont let you off so easily. You are the one who said that the Algonquin people matched nicely with those in the Book of Mormon. I want to know perhaps a quote a page # etc. You made the claim now provide the source and back it up.

You also said their written language was Micmac I also asked for a CFR from you on Micmac being a written language during the Book of Mormon period.

[annoyed]

Again I wont let you off so easily. You are the one who said that the Algonquin people matched nicely with those in the Book of Mormon. I want to know perhaps a quote a page # etc. You made the claim now provide the source and back it up.

You also said their written language was Micmac I also asked for a CFR from you on Micmac being a written language during the Book of Mormon period.

Chapter Thirteen for both. GET THE BOOK, you're not getting off that easy!

[Anijen]

Chapter Thirteen for both. GET THE BOOK, you're not getting off that easy!

Could you quote it for me? Pretty please? Just the relevant part.

[jkfrost]

Recent discussions on Book of Mormon geography scarcely prepared me for this weekend. While staying with some friends for the Thanksgiving holiday, we were enjoying some BoM reading on Wednesday evening when the a verse under consideration (in Helaman 3) caused the father to comment on the probable location of these events being in the northeastern portion of what is now the USA. By way of background, this family is very, very "TBM" (the father is serving his second call as Bishop), and they are especially well read in "Deseret Book" type stuff.

Intrigued by his comment, I asked where that came from. He then told me how a member of his ward had lent them a DVD that argued for a "Great Lakes" location for the BoM, and he was very convinced by it. The DVD was produced by "Wayne May", apparently a precursor to Rodney Meldrum. I was able to watch about 25 minutes of it (it's 2 hours long!), and found it to be very interesting.

Then, this afternoon, a book came in the mail. Turns out the video had been convincing enough for my host to order one of Wayne May's books! It's about 200 pages, with lots of pictures, but I found the most interesting points to be in the introduction. Here are some excerpts:

Beyond the introduction, the book goes into great detail arguing for the different aspects of the Great Lakes theory, but most surprisingly (and disturbingly), it is very, very dependent on the Michigan Relics. Not a good sign. (Also, you can read this review by Mesoamericanist Brant Gardner.)

Beyond the DVD and book, I was also surprised to peruse the latest issue of the LDS-targeted newspaper "Mormon Times", and found two ads for Great Lakes-promoting books (including an ad occupying no less than a half-page of space for Rodney Meldrum's latest and something called "Choice Above All Other Lands" by Vincent Coon).

These are definitely interesting times for Book of Mormon archaeology, and it's been an interesting couple of days for Cinepro!

I have always been intrigued by these relics but never disturbed :

Son of the Right Hand

see pages 1 - 5 ( look for son of the left hand )

even so my thoughts are the Nephites and Lamanites -

like us in the Americas spread themselves way north and way south.

starting in mid America.

After the war Moroni brought the plates up to NY to visit his Lamanite wife

and to see the statue of liberty.

[Nemesis]

Chapter Thirteen for both. GET THE BOOK, you're not getting off that easy!

You can cite what you are referencing, I suggest you do it. I am not going to allow you to do this much longer.

Nemesis

[annoyed]

Could you quote it for me? Pretty please? Just the relevant part.

You can cite what you are referencing, I suggest you do it. I am not going to allow you to do this much longer. Nemesis

Due to copyright laws I won't cite the entire chapter, but here is a taste:

• Chapter 13 is called "The Northern Tribes, The Algonquin Connection (600 B.C. - 900 A.D.)
• It is eleven pages long.
• She describes the different tribes among the Algonguin family.
• She spends some amount of time on the Ojibway, who have DNA connections with Israel.
• She talks about the languages among them, with a picture of Micmac characters next to the characters from the Anthon transcript.
• From the references section are sources by William Warren "History of the Ojibway People" and Dean R. Snow "The Iroquois" among others.

There is much more in the other 22 chapters.

[Calm]

She talks about the languages among them, with a picture of Micmac characters next to the characters from the Anthon transcript.[*]

And this relates to the BoM how given that apparently the first known example dates to the 1600's over 1000 years after the BoM timeline:

Scholars have debated whether the earliest known M

[Anijen]

John Clark has reviewed Olives book; Here are some relevant points;

LIMITED GREAT LAKES GEOGRAPHIES

The sixteen chapters of Olive's book cover four broad topics. In four introductory chapters, she dismisses the case for limited Mesoamerican geographies, establishes the prophetic identification of the United States of America as the land of promise mentioned in the Book of Mormon (Canada and Mexico are explicitly excluded), makes a case for a limited territory for Book of Mormon lands, and reconstructs the physical geography of the western New York region for Book of Mormon times. The next two chapters address issues of Jaredite occupation, with the next eight chapters covering issues of Nephite geography: specifically, the locations and features of the lands of Nephi, Zarahemla, Bountiful, the eastern borders, the narrow neck, the land northward, the region of many waters, and the hill Cumorah.4 In the final two chapters, Olive considers the question of archaeological evidence and provides a final summary.

Olive places Book of Mormon lands in western New York. She assumes that the modern-day Hill Cumorah outside of Palmyra is the hill mentioned in the text. None of the numerous maps in her text carries a scale; she makes no attempt to correlate postulated Book of Mormon features to modern state boundaries or towns, so the precise locations of minor features are hard to determine. Moreover, the numerous maps are light, fuzzy, cramped, and difficult to read. The bulk of Olive's proposed geography occupies western New York between Lake Erie and the Genesee River, an area about 90 by 110 miles. This limited geography applies only to the narrative center of Book of Mormon lands, but even so, it appears much too small and off scale by a whole order of magnitude. There is hardly any room in a territory this size for groups to have become lost for many days when traveling, for example, from Zarahemla to Nephi.

The hill Cumorah is located in the northeast corner of Olive's land southward, with the Finger Lakes region being the "land of many waters." Lake Erie is the west sea, and its southwestern extremity (Ohio shore near Kirtland) is the land of "first inheritance." Lake Ontario is the Ripliancum of the Jaredite report and the North Sea of the Nephite report. These identifications take care of the obvious bodies of water that any reviewer can see on modern maps. From here, Olive gets creative and interesting. To her credit, she has studied topographic maps of the region and has worked through basic geologic reports.

The Book of Mormon narrative obviously requires more than just northern and western seas. Olive finds these other seas for the southern and eastern margins, as well as the Jaredite mention of a "sea that divides the land," in the former presence of Pleistocene (postglacial period) lakes, now only evident in geologic reports and marked by the presence of lowland marshes on the current landscape. Early Lake Tonawanda was a narrow, east-west-tending lake that extended from modern-day Niagara Falls to about Rochester. This lake paralleled the southern shore of Lake Ontario. The narrow strip of higher ground trapped between these two lakes was about twenty to twenty-five miles wide and about seventy miles long. This isolated strip is her candidate for the land northward and the probable location of most Jaredite settlements. By recourse to reconstructions of ancient lakes that no longer exist, Olive is able to nearly surround Book of Mormon lands by water, create a narrow neck of land within this currently landlocked region, and to make sense of all the water passages in the text.

Unlike any previous geography I have encountered, Olive implicates a universal flood at the time of Noah to make her point. In doing so she makes untenable assumptions about water depths and drying rates. She opines that the Jaredites fled the Old World soon after the flood, meaning that much of the water would still have been ponded on the land surface in places such as upstate New York. But she continues to identify these bodies of water until the end of the Nephite era, even after crucifixion cataclysms altered the land surface. No one seriously doubts the evidence of ancient lakeshores and lake sediments in New York any more than they question the former presence of Lake Bonneville in the Salt Lake Valley. The ancient lake benches are obvious. But Olive cannot have it both ways. These same reports must give sufficient indication that the lakes in question were ancient and disappeared over ten thousand years ago. If one wants to accept the word of geologists, it has to be a full commitment that includes their dating of the phenomena in question. One is not free to extract only the scientific statements favorable to one's view unless one has the training to raise valid scientific objections to contradictory material. Melting continental ice sheets and Noah's flood are mutually incompatible.

The question at stake here is the appropriateness of uniformitarian principles: how much can we rely on modern knowledge of geologic processes to interpret those of the past? In terms of dating ancient lake beds, it would be a rather simple matter to find the date of the oldest archaeological sites in these regions and to have them provide terminus dates for the disappearance of the various lakes. This has not been done. In her zeal to reconstitute a plausible hydrology for Book of Mormon lands, Olive simply ignores all evidence for temporal placement that does not suit her purpose. The other books listed above make the same mistake, but in archaeological rather than geological time.

The city of Zarahemla in Olive's microgeography would have been in the area around present-day East Aurora, New York; this is less than twenty miles east of the shore of Lake Erie to the west and from Buffalo to the northwest. This location does not leave sufficient room for settlements and wilderness west of Zarahemla. Buffalo Creek

[annoyed]

John Clark has reviewed Olives book; Here are some relevant points;

John Clark should refrain from doing reviews. He does little to advance our understanding of the geography when all he does is run models through the Sorenson model.

Just like justifying a tropical climate area by one verse, these so-called experts scrutinize an amateur with further non-sense:

There is hardly any room in a territory this size for groups to have become lost for many days when traveling, for example, from Zarahemla to Nephi.

Quite the contrary:

• In a thick forest, you become lost because tracks are not left, unlike jungles where they are.
• How could 450 people, with animals in tow, disappear into "the wilderness" when immediately pursued by soldiers?
• Then, for those 450 people to stop after only 8 days and build a city - "so close" to the enemy they fled?

Clark ignores these facts, despite being told them many times.

The area Olive describes is large enough for everything detailed in the BoM. Unless you have driven and hiked the terrain, you would not know that.

[Calm]

In a thick forest, you become lost because tracks are not left, unlike jungles where they are.

???

[annoyed]

???

Ground cover.

[annoyed]

And this relates to the BoM how given that apparently the first known example dates to the 1600's over 1000 years after the BoM timeline:

Your confusing dates of discovery with dates of origin. This from Olive:

Further, it was quite apparent that the Micmac writing system was not a modern invention but had been among the natives for "who knows how long." (p. 143)

[Hermes]

annoyed (formerly called "honestly"): no sockpuppets. You are banned. Don't come back. ~hermes

[Cold Steel]

Just like justifying a tropical climate area by one verse, these so-called experts scrutinize an amateur with further non-sense.

No one justified anything by just one verse. Rather, it's more the lack of verses that impresses me.

When there is no cold or ice, people don't complain about it. And when there is cold and ice, they do complain...often. In Stan Freberg's spoof history on the United States of America, George Washington runs into Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and others and says, "Hey, did I ever tell you how cold it was in Valley For....?

"Yeah."

"Sure, George."

"Many times!"

I don't put anything in my emails about ice storms these days, primarily because we haven't had an ice storm in years. But if you search my emails back for the year we had one, you would have gotten an ear-full. Our power went out, we were freezing and in despair. If military commanders spent so many years warring against each other, why no complaints about the biting cold? Why no crossing over rivers that were frozen over? Look at Mormon history between 1830 and 1845. It's loaded with snow, ice and storms. John Taylor, Parley and Orson Pratt and others stomped through miles of snow. One complained he tried to eat a piece of stale bread along the way that was so frozen he couldn't bite through the crust! The Lord even used weather a few times to cut off our enemies from the main body of the saints.

So it's not that there is a verse in the Book of Mormon. It's the lack of other verses.

.

[Calm]

Your confusing dates of discovery with dates of origin.

No, I am not. But just assuming something exists prior to its first known appearance is problematic when using it as evidence. It is certainly a probability, especially if its first appearance is already well-developed, but that probability lessens the further one moves away from the desired time period.

[Tiberius]

To claim that these prophecies help us understand where within the hemisphere the Book of Mormon took place is silly. Such an argument is based on ignorance and/or chauvinism. Since Lehi's descendants would be spread throughout the entire hemisphere by 1500 (with either an HGT or an LGT assumption), and since Europeans invaded and pillaged the entire hemisphere, and since religiously motivated Europeans colonized all parts of the hemisphere, these specific prophecies apply throughout the hemisphere.

Ignoring scripture are we, an inconvenient truth?

1 Nephi 22: 7

7 And it meaneth that the time cometh that after all the house of Israel have been scattered and confounded, that the Lord God will raise up a mighty nation among the Gentiles, yea, even upon the face of this land; and by them shall our seed be scattered.

"Face of this land." "A mighty nation." Singular, specific. This refers to the United States of America. This land where Nephi was located. Yet you assume it was both American continents? Why, because it's chauvinistic to presume that Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile are not the one mighty nation among the Gentiles? How silly.