Animals in the Book of Mormon

[Terry Moe]

In another thread, I brought up the topic of the many animals mentioned in the Book of Mormon that did not actually exist in the Americas until Europeans introduced them. Two posters claimed that my information was "50 years out of date" and that questions about the animals had been answered many times. One poster linked me to this page at FAIRWiki while another suggested that I look at Jeff Lindsey's site. However, it is flatly false to say that these two sources address the questions I brought up. Most of the questions concerning animals in the Book of Mormon are not addressed on these sources, and those that are addressed, the answers are unsatisfactory. To be very clear about what I'm talking about, here's a list.

Goats. There are multiple literal references to goats in the Americas in the Book of Mormon, such as in Enos 1:21. In reality goats are not native to the Americas; they were brought by Europeans in the 16th century.

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses this issue.

Sheep. There are many references to sheep in the Book of Mormon, mostly metaphorical but some literal, such as Ether 9:18. Like goats, sheep are not native to America; they, too, were introduced by Europeans.

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses this issue.

Cattle and Oxen. There are many literal references to the Nephites raising herds of cattle and oxen, as in 3 Nehpi 3,4. Like goats and sheep, cattle are not native to America. They were introduced by Europeans.

Apologist response: Jeff Lindsey speculates that it's reasonable to use the words "cow" and "cattle" to describe some other animal. (Remind me to not order beef in a restaurant run by Mormons.) His leading candidate is the buffalo. Actually the buffalo is not native to America either. The animal that Buffalo Bill hunted and that inspired the lyric "give me a home where the buffalo roam" is actually the bison. The bison is native to North America as far south as northern Mexico, but not to Central or South America. In any case, there seems to be widespread awareness that, name of the hippopotamus not withstanding, using the name of one animal to describe another is a pretty desperate defense, especially in a book that claims to be the "most correct ever written".

Donkey. The donkey is mentioned literally in 1 Nephi 18:25. Once again, it is not native to America, but instead was introduced by Europeans.

Apologist response: FAIRWiki suggests that it's actually refering to tapirs rather than donkeys. To anyone who's seen a tapir, this is even more far-fetched than the cattle explanation.

Swine. Swine are mentioned literally in Ether 9:18. Pigs are not native to America, but were introduced by Europeans in the 15th century.

Apologist response: From FAIRWiki, "The early Americas did have a native pig. The Aztecs called it pisote, which means 'glutton'." So another case of trying to switch names of species.

Raising animals. The Book of Mormon mentions the Nephites having flocks and herds of animals literally hundreds of times, making it clear beyond doubt that raising domestic livestock was a part of their civilization. Yet meso-American civilizations did not actually raise large animals of any sort. According to this detailed discussion, the only animals they raised for food were turkeys and ducks. Other meat was taken from hunting, but as it notes "meat was a very minor portion" of their diet. So the accounts of livestock in the Book of Mormon don't jive with the meso-American diet.

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses this issue.

Meso-American animals. Many animals were familiar in meso-American civilizations, including deer, turekys, ducks, iguanas, dogs, rabbits, and many types of insects. None of these are ever mentioned in the Book of Mormon. (It mentions wild dogs but not domestic ones.)

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses with this issue.

Whenever I point out an inaccuracy in the Book of Mormon, I'm told to consult Jeff Lindsey or FAIRWiki. Yet as we can see, those sources do not actually address most of my questions, and those that they do address they don't provide satisfactory answers for. So can anybody here do better?

[frankenstein]

Whenever I point out an inaccuracy in the Book of Mormon, I'm told to consult Jeff Lindsey or FAIRWiki. Yet as we can see, those sources do not actually address most of my questions, and those that they do address they don't provide satisfactory answers for. So can anybody here do better?

ask Jesus

[cdowis]

"Apologists have not addressed the issue"

Actually I have addressed this particular argument several times, but will be happy to deal with it in a more definitive way, since we have a thread dedicated to this issue.

Introduction: This is what I call the "not found, not found" fallacy, or the "we ain't got no horse bones" technique. It is easily identified when the critic begins the sentence "The cow/goat/sheep/etc was FIRST introduced by the europeans,....." Of course in the case of the horse, we already have evidence that they were in the Americas previously, but apparently extinct when Lehi landed.

A few facts to consider:

1. Mesoamerica is largely a tropical rainforest. This is very hot and wet climate.

2. Organic material decays very quickly in a hot and wet environment.

A few questions to consider, if you feel inclined:

1. I would suggest that excavations back to the BOM time period, 500BCE to 400AD, are relatively infrequent. I am not an archeologist, so anyone presenting this argument needs to give us the facts on actual scientific explorations for this time period.

2. I would suggest that finding animal remains in those excavations are infrequent. Those who present this argument needs to give us the results of those excavations regarding animal remains.

3.

Many animals were familiar in meso-American civilizations, including deer, turekys, ducks, iguanas, dogs, rabbits, and many types of insects.

Specifically, since we "know" about these animals, please give us specific excavations to the BOM time period where we have verified the presence of those animals. I suggest that this list in incomplete.

3. You specifically mention animals listed in Ether, which is during the Olmec time period. You need to address questions 1-3 for that time period as well. What animal bones have been found in excavations to verify what animals were "familiar" to the Olmecs.

Analysis:

You presented this argument. I suggest that we simply do not "know" all of the animals present in mesoamerica during this time, and, considering the topography and climate, and the amount of research conducted, it would not be expected for archeologists to have a complete picture.

"Not found, not exist" is a logical fallacy. I consider it under the category of "unconfirmed" issues. And archeology is full of such issues, and just a matter for further investigation.

[Walden]

In another thread, I brought up the topic of the many animals mentioned in the Book of Mormon that did not actually exist in the Americas until Europeans introduced them. Two posters claimed that my information was "50 years out of date" and that questions about the animals had been answered many times. One poster linked me to this page at FAIRWiki while another suggested that I look at Jeff Lindsey's site. However, it is flatly false to say that these two sources address the questions I brought up. Most of the questions concerning animals in the Book of Mormon are not addressed on these sources, and those that are addressed, the answers are unsatisfactory. To be very clear about what I'm talking about, here's a list.

Goats. There are multiple literal references to goats in the Americas in the Book of Mormon, such as in Enos 1:21. In reality goats are not native to the Americas; they were brought by Europeans in the 16th century.

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses this issue.

Sheep. There are many references to sheep in the Book of Mormon, mostly metaphorical but some literal, such as Ether 9:18. Like goats, sheep are not native to America; they, too, were introduced by Europeans.

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses this issue.

Cattle and Oxen. There are many literal references to the Nephites raising herds of cattle and oxen, as in 3 Nehpi 3,4. Like goats and sheep, cattle are not native to America. They were introduced by Europeans.

Apologist response: Jeff Lindsey speculates that it's reasonable to use the words "cow" and "cattle" to describe some other animal. (Remind me to not order beef in a restaurant run by Mormons.) His leading candidate is the buffalo. Actually the buffalo is not native to America either. The animal that Buffalo Bill hunted and that inspired the lyric "give me a home where the buffalo roam" is actually the bison. The bison is native to North America as far south as northern Mexico, but not to Central or South America. In any case, there seems to be widespread awareness that, name of the hippopotamus not withstanding, using the name of one animal to describe another is a pretty desperate defense, especially in a book that claims to be the "most correct ever written".

Donkey. The donkey is mentioned literally in 1 Nephi 18:25. Once again, it is not native to America, but instead was introduced by Europeans.

Apologist response: FAIRWiki suggests that it's actually refering to tapirs rather than donkeys. To anyone who's seen a tapir, this is even more far-fetched than the cattle explanation.

Swine. Swine are mentioned literally in Ether 9:18. Pigs are not native to America, but were introduced by Europeans in the 15th century.

Apologist response: From FAIRWiki, "The early Americas did have a native pig. The Aztecs called it pisote, which means 'glutton'." So another case of trying to switch names of species.

Raising animals. The Book of Mormon mentions the Nephites having flocks and herds of animals literally hundreds of times, making it clear beyond doubt that raising domestic livestock was a part of their civilization. Yet meso-American civilizations did not actually raise large animals of any sort. According to this detailed discussion, the only animals they raised for food were turkeys and ducks. Other meat was taken from hunting, but as it notes "meat was a very minor portion" of their diet. So the accounts of livestock in the Book of Mormon don't jive with the meso-American diet.

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses this issue.

Meso-American animals. Many animals were familiar in meso-American civilizations, including deer, turekys, ducks, iguanas, dogs, rabbits, and many types of insects. None of these are ever mentioned in the Book of Mormon. (It mentions wild dogs but not domestic ones.)

Apologist response: Neither FAIRWiki nor Jeff Lindsey addresses with this issue.

Whenever I point out an inaccuracy in the Book of Mormon, I'm told to consult Jeff Lindsey or FAIRWiki. Yet as we can see, those sources do not actually address most of my questions, and those that they do address they don't provide satisfactory answers for. So can anybody here do better?

If you are looking for hard facts or evidence of the existence of these animals in the Americas at the time of the Book of Mormon, it will not be found. I have tried.

The best that you will get from an apologist is 'just because we haven't found any evidence yet doesn't mean that it is not out there....we just haven't found it yet." Likewise, you will often hear that "maybe the word "donkey" was used in the Book of Mormon in relation to another, similar looking animal that did exist in the Americas at that time." Those are the two most common answers that I come across.

[cdowis]

The best that you will get from an apologist is 'just because we haven't found any evidence yet doesn't mean that it is not out there....we just haven't found it yet."

I went well beyond that argument. "Please show us that it is reasonable to expect to find such evidence considering the climate, topology and the state of archeology in this area."

[Gervin]

I went well beyond that argument. "Please show us that it is reasonable to expect to find such evidence considering the climate, topology and the state of archeology in this area."

The July/August issue of Biblical Archaeology contains an interview with Lawrence Stager (Dorot Professor of the Archeology of Israel at Harvard University) and he is asked about changes in the field of archeology in the past 35 years. He responds that "we collect things that were previously neglected or thrown out. For example, fauna, nonhuman bones - what most people call animal bones ... fauna is now collected through fine sieving." It's not only bones but also botanical samples and even charred botanical samples can be filtered out through a water flotation method. Tons of materials are found in mesoamerica and a review of research papers shows this - mesolinks is one source of information. So, people collect and investigate in a meticulous manner. Moreso than they did 35 years ago or than they did in the Middle East for nearly 100 years.

The notion that nothing below-grade survives in the jungle environment is not correct. Just this summer we learned of a 1,600 year-old Mayan tomb containing organic materials. Ceramics survive, grave goods survive, and, obviously, stone carvings, tools, and buildings survive. Stuff survives and the remnants of that stuff don't go unnoticed by professionals.

If, as you claimed on the recently closed topic, that evidence continues to mount in favor of the Book of Mormon historicity, it seems reasonable to see LDS archaeologists responding favorably to the vast amount of research, archeological digs, and finds coming out of mesoamerica, making the necessary linkage to the BOM. I don't see this happening.

[handys003]

Hmm...interesting Terry Moe. You listed swine are not native to Americas. So all the swine posted on the Mayan temple wall are not indigenous (pic attached)? How about chickens? Were chickens native to America or did the Polynesians bring them over?

BTW IIRC there have been many times that posters like myself and zak et all have not referred you to FAIRWiki. We gave you pics and links. I suspect you just don't want to look at such to crush your view.

[StuddleyG]

One explanation I've heard is that the animals spoken of in the Book of Mormon were brought over by the Jaredites and later used by the Nephites. It is postulated that all these animals simply died off as Nephites were wiped out and the Lamanite civilization fell apart. As the civilizations fell apart, all the animals were hunted down for food until they became extinct.

[cdowis]

The July/August issue of Biblical Archaeology contains an interview with Lawrence Stager (Dorot Professor of the Archeology of Israel at Harvard University) and he is asked about changes in the field of archeology in the past 35 years. He responds that "we collect things that were previously neglected or thrown out. For example, fauna, nonhuman bones - what most people call animal bones ... fauna is now collected through fine sieving." It's not only bones but also botanical samples and even charred botanical samples can be filtered out through a water flotation method. Tons of materials are found in mesoamerica and a review of research papers shows this - mesolinks is one source of information. So, people collect and investigate in a meticulous manner. Moreso than they did 35 years ago or than they did in the Middle East for nearly 100 years.

I am puzzled that you do not know the difference between the dry deserts of the Middle East and the rain forests of mesoamerica, and how that affects the topic at hand.

The notion that nothing below-grade survives in the jungle environment is not correct.

I find it puzzling why you find it necessary to put words in my mouth. I guess you just makes things up as you go.

Just this summer we learned of a 1,600 year-old Mayan tomb containing organic materials. Ceramics survive, grave goods survive, and, obviously, stone carvings, tools, and buildings survive. Stuff survives and the remnants of that stuff don't go unnoticed by professionals.

Sigh.

I am talking about animal bones which, after they have been eaten, they are simply discarded. Not buried in a tomb. Also, I am puzzled how the survival of buildings, stone carvings, etc relate to our topic here.

If, as you claimed on the recently closed topic, that evidence continues to mount in favor of the Book of Mormon historicity, it seems reasonable to see LDS archaeologists responding favorably to the vast amount of research, archeological digs, and finds coming out of mesoamerica, making the necessary linkage to the BOM. I don't see this happening.

Your entire post is a jumble of misconceived ideas.

You do not appear to be capable of presenting a cogent argument. Nothing personal, but your opinion on what LDS archeologists think or don't think holds little interest for me.

Try again later, and give it more thought before posting such nonsense.

AND, IF YOU ARE GOING TO QUOTE ME, GIVE US THE EXACT QUOTE FROM MY POST INSTEAD OF MAKING IT UP!!!!!

[cdowis]

Gervin,

This is what I actually said:

I would suggest that finding animal remains in those excavations are infrequent.

[Zakuska]

Hmm...interesting Terry Moe. You listed swine are not native to Americas. So all the swine posted on the Mayan temple wall are not indigineous (pic attached)? How about chickens? Were chickens native to America or did the Polynesians bring them over?

And you just got to love all those "european" ( ) sheep and lambs that the Spanish saw the Inca King sacrifice at the Temple of the sun at Machu Picchu, Peru.

After the fast, in the evening before the festival, the Ynca sacrificial Priests prepared the sheep and lambs for sacrifice, and got ready the other offerings of food and drink that were to be offered to the Sun. All these offerings had been provided by the people who came to the feast, not only the Curacas and envoys, but also all their relations, vassals, and servants.

http://ftp.fortunaty...inca/inca03.htm

The Spanish also reported that Chickens were an integeral part of the Incan Economy when they got here in 1532. Science has now proved that.

Argument about the origins and date of introduction of the domestic fowl or chicken (Gallus gallus) to the Americas has raged for over 30 years. Despite claims that it might be native to the region (1), it has never been recovered or reported from paleontological, Paleo-Indian, or, until now, prehistoric archaeological contexts in the Americas. A Portuguese or Spanish introduction to the east coast of South America around AD 1500 has been suggested (2), but when Pizarro reached Peru in 1532, he found that chickens were already an integral part of Incan economy and culture, suggesting at least some history of chickens in the region. Consequently, there have been numerous suggestions of a pre-European chicken introduction to the west coast of South America (3

[Olavarria]

If the Book of Mormon is the modern expansion of an ancient text, then these "pigs, cows, horses" mike be other animals like peccaries and tapir.

[Anijen]

What Pedro said and I might add as far as archeology they really didn't look for animal bones in the past, if they found them they threw them out. Now days they look at everything, plant life, animal bones etc...

Edited to add when I said in the past, I mean recent past.

[Gervin]

I am puzzled that you do not know the difference between the dry deserts of the Middle East and the rain forests of mesoamerica, and how that affects the topic at hand.

The larger point is that methods in archaeology have changed significantly in the past 35 years and the examination of everything taken out of the ground, be it at Beit She'an or El Mirador, will include items such as animals bones, fragments of bones, seeds, etc. If you believe this to be the case only in the Middle East then you are woefully misinformed.

I find it puzzling why you find it necessary to put words in my mouth. I guess you just makes things up as you go.

I was responding to a sentiment, expressed on this board, that artifacts cannot survive the jungles of mesoamerica. You alluded to this in reference to steel and iron swords in a previous post. Others have expressed this notion more comprehensively on this board.

I am talking about animal bones which, after they have been eaten, they are simply discarded. Not buried in a tomb.

Is a little research too much to ask for? Kitty Emery, an archaeologist at the Florida Museum of Natural History, has studied 80,000 animal bones found in 25 Maya trash mounds to map the effects of ancient hunting on animal populations over 4,000 years. Animal bones have also been discovered, with ceramics, to provide ballast for new plaster floors in homes. We also know that sea shells, obsidian knives and small animal bones were placed in a ritual fashion in front of buildings. They're not just in tombs.

Your entire post is a jumble of misconceived ideas. You do not appear to be capable of presenting a cogent argument.

This from someone who claimed, yet couldn't support, the belief in a Hebrew presence in Costa Rica to the extent that cemetery locations were drastically altered. I'll take it as a compliment.

AND, IF YOU ARE GOING TO QUOTE ME, GIVE US THE EXACT QUOTE FROM MY POST INSTEAD OF MAKING IT UP!!!!!

I use the quote feature on the board (as here, above) or quotation marks ("sample") when I quote someone. By recognizing these devices you will know when you're being quoted.

[cdowis]

Is a little research too much to ask for?

This is precisely what I was asking for.

Kitty Emery, an archaeologist at the Florida Museum of Natural History, has studied 80,000 animal bones found in 25 Maya trash mounds to map the effects of ancient hunting on animal populations over 4,000 years.

OK, so these were wild, undomesticated animals. Please provide the reference.

Animal bones have also been discovered, with ceramics, to provide ballast for new plaster floors in homes. We also know that sea shells, obsidian knives and small animal bones were placed in a ritual fashion in front of buildings. They're not just in tombs.

I would be interested in your references. I'm specifically looking for the BOM time period.

[handys003]

Hmm...another thing Terry. Why do you assume the BoM is limiting itself to Meso-America? That is modern day archeology term of the Central American region. BoM does not recognize modern archaeologist interpretation of a region. The BoM can be extended from SW USA all the way to Chile in S. America and range from desert to tropical. Even could be as vast as Upstate NY. Ancient Polynesians sailed to Alaska to Chile. When they talk about the Pacific in tales and chants/hulas of legends they mean all over not a small area. Such limited thinking.

[Bernard Gui]

You listed swine are not native to Americas. So all the swine posted on the Mayan temple wall are not indigenous (pic attached)?

That's no pig! It's a tapir! He's riding a tapir!!!

Bernard

[Gervin]

Maya Rituals Caused Ancient Decline in Big Game

Kelly Hearn

for National Geographic News

November 15, 2007

Maya rulers' growing demand for animals of symbolic value may have caused a decline in big game, like jaguars, in ancient Latin America, a new study suggests.

Faced with environmental problems and doubts about their ability to provide for their followers, the Maya elite may have ordered more hunting of large mammals whose meat, skins, and teeth provided proof of power and status, the study says.

Kitty Emery, an archaeologist at the Florida Museum of Natural History, has studied 80,000 animal bones found in 25 Maya trash mounds to map the effects of ancient hunting on animal populations over 4,000 years.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/11/071115-maya-sacrifice.html

Ancient Maya Buried Relatives, Artifacts Under Homes

By Rossella Lorenzi

Tue Apr 20, 2010 07:53 AM ET

An excavation of ancient Maya homes belonging to lower class families revealed they buried relatives and artifacts under their own floors.

Illiterate Maya people recorded their history by burying their domestic universe under their floors, according to excavations of modest Maya homes in central Belize.

Analysis of objects and human remains embedded beneath these ordinary Maya houses from the Classic period (250-900 A.D.) revealed that farmers and servants cached objects and buried relatives within their residences.

"Commoners may not have had the written word, but they had the means to record their own history under their feet, within walls and under their roof," Lisa Lucero, anthropology professor at the University of Illinois, wrote in the Journal of Social Archaeology.

Lucero examined the arrangement, color and condition of several Maya artifacts excavated at two commoner residences in a small Maya center called Saturday Creek, in central Belize.

Occupied from about 450 to 1150 A.D., the two homes revealed about a dozen human remains of men, women and children with artifacts arranged around and on top of the bodies.

According to the researcher, those who were domestically interred were family members who died closest to calendrical rites every 40 or 52 years or at the time, every 20-30 years, in which houses needed to be re-roofed.

Indeed, burial in the home was a major event.

"After the funeral rites, the house and what it contained were destroyed and burned. The ceremonial destruction provided the basis for the new house," Lucero said.

To provide ballast for a new plaster floor, the Maya used broken and whole vessels, colorful ceramic fragments, animal bones and rocks. All items were symbolically arranged.

"The Maya deposited items that had a particular history with the family. Once placed and buried, the objects disappeared from sight, not memory," Lucero said.

In order to enter the domestic underground museum, things that were used in life had to be "de-animated." The Maya would render these items useless by breaking them. In this way the artifacts could enter the next stage of their life history.

http://news.discovery.com/archaeology/maya-burial-homes-histories.html

MEXICO CITY. Remains of Prehispanic domestic architecture and an offering of ceramic and marine elements were found at Jonuta Archaeological Zone, in Tabasco, a discovery that confirms partial use of bricks in ancient Maya settlements at Tabasco plain near 850 AD.

Exploration conducted by the National Institute of Anthropology and History (INAH) as part of the first field season of Jonuta Archaeological Project 2009 lead to the finding, with the aim of deepening studies at southeast Tabasco, where Prehispanic dwellers were great ceramics producers that traded them locally and with faraway places.

Four parallel masonry walls were found on the site located at the right bank of Usumacinta River, built with little thin bricks, as well as 2 small slabs placed vertically in front of the last wall, as a kind of stelae, made out of powdered shell mortar.

[cdowis]

OK, I see three references here.

Maya rulers' growing demand for animals of symbolic value may have caused a decline in big game, like jaguars, in ancient Latin America, a new study suggests.

1. Wild, non-domesticated animals, "game animals" after the war of extinction.

An excavation of ancient Maya homes belonging to lower class families revealed they buried relatives and artifacts under their own floors. ........Occupied from about 450 to 1150 A.D., the two homes revealed about a dozen human remains of men, women and children with artifacts arranged around and on top of the bodies.

2. Interesting, but don't see anything relevant to this topic.

Sea shells and other marine objects, bone awls, obsidian knives and small animals

[StuddleyG]

http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2009_Science_and_the_Book_of_Mormon.html

Here is a presentation made by an LDS paleontologist. The latter part of the presentation deals with animals. He makes a few interesting observations.

I really wish there were more apologists taking on the problem of Book of Mormon animals. I don't think the issue has recieved enough attention.

[cdowis]

Thanks for the link.

Here are a few interesting points for Terry Moe, Gervin, et al, to chew on:

(he makes the point that the last fossils do not necessarily date when the extinction occurred)

A number of fossils of these animals have been found much later in time. Some fossils of these llamas date back to only 3,000, or 4,000 or 5,000 years ago. It should be explained that the last ones to have lived would not be found as fossils. The chances of this happening with any extinct species are extremely remote, thousands of times less likely than winning a lottery! Small populations would have existed after the latest dated fossil, possibly a couple of thousand years later.

......................

Horses weren't here in America after about 10,000 years ago according to Smithsonian archaeologists. As you know horses (and asses) are mentioned as being present among both the Jaredites and Nephites. It might surprise most of you that the history of the horse is mainly here in America. The very first horses come from North America, and their record goes back to about 58 million years ago. Horses were small, forest dwelling animals at the time. It wasn't until much later that horses reached the Old World, being roughly the size of modern forms then. Columbus only reintroduced the horse to America. I've actually done a lot of work with fossil horses from many areas and from different periods of time. A lot of my work has been done on them in Mesoamerica, primarily in Mexico. While the vast majority of dates for these various kinds of horses are well before man was known in the New World, a few of the dates are very surprisingly young. I have Carbon-14 dates on horses that are as recent as 800 years. Other dates are only 1200 years to 1400 years ago. More dates in this range are needed to be able to convince others that horses were indeed here before 1493, when they were reintroduced. Other paleontologists have produced dates on fossil horses that show they lived here long after the 10,000 years before stated [when they were supposed to have been extinct]. This slide is of a partial horse skeleton that was put together with my colleagues in Mexico. An earlier slide showed the location where it was collected. It was that picture that I said to remember from Durango, Mexico, where a lot of fossils were found within one small area.

I suggest that you read the full article, regarding other animals mentioned in the BOM, before posting again.

[jmordecai]

I went well beyond that argument. "Please show us that it is reasonable to expect to find such evidence considering the climate, topology and the state of archeology in this area."

Why are we limited to Mesoamerica? There has been no authoritative endorsement that this is BoM geography.

How unlucky the Nephite record be so long on extinct and mislabeled animals and so short on those extant. Since we also have not identified any Nephites, maybe they too are mislabeled.

[Gervin]

Thanks for the link.

Here are a few interesting points for Terry Moe, Gervin, et al, to chew on:

I suggest that you read the full article, regarding other animals mentioned in the BOM, before posting again.

I read the FAIR "article" - it's really a transcript of a talk given by Dr. Miller, based on a book he wrote titled, "Science and the Book of Mormon." Dr. Miller appears to be a smart man and has published numerous academic papers in his professional field of paleontology. I can't figure out why this book doesn't contain footnotes to support his claims as would be found in an academic paper? For someone who is familiar with the rigors of describing methodology, assumptions, and references to support conclusions it's odd to read his many generalized statements without the requisite citations. I do see the book lists source materials at the end of the book, but without any clear connection to the text. Odd.

[livy111us]

I read the FAIR "article" - it's really a transcript of a talk given by Dr. Miller, based on a book he wrote titled, "Science and the Book of Mormon." Dr. Miller appears to be a smart man and has published numerous academic papers in his professional field of paleontology. I can't figure out why this book doesn't contain footnotes to support his claims as would be found in an academic paper? For someone who is familiar with the rigors of describing methodology, assumptions, and references to support conclusions it's odd to read his many generalized statements without the requisite citations. I do see the book lists source materials at the end of the book, but without any clear connection to the text. Odd.

He is currently writing an academic paper, but is gathering more evidence before it is published. The material in his books "Science and The Book of Mormon" and "Creation" (http://bookstore.fairlds.org/product.php?id_product=1086) will be part of the academic paper.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Why are we limited to Mesoamerica? There has been no authoritative endorsement that this is Since we also have not identified any Nephites, maybe they too are mislabeled.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but how do we know an Nephite artifact or anything Nephite when we see it?