Animals in the Book of Mormon

[thesometimesaint]

Tarski:

Car makers test each an every car that comes off the assembly line.

I know what a random number is. Do you know what a representative sample is?

Is that an appeal to authority?

Very simple the Dodo was limited in its range to the island of Mauritius. When the last died. It became extinct.

N in this case is not indeterminate. Using your deck of cards as the example. 80% of 52 = 42 when talking whole cards. Still useful as playing cards, with a few problems of course.

To stick with the problem of horses in Mesoamerica. All we know is. We have references to the horse in the BoM. We know that the horse evolved in the Americas. Beyond that it is speculation. We are in much the same position as the city of Troy was until the later part of the 19th Century. The lack of evidence had no relevance to whether Troy actually existed or not. We just had to find it.

Who was more ignorant? The people who claimed who claimed Troy was a fairy tale or the person who found it?

[Ariarates]

In the end, the phrase "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is just a cute quip and is not a precisely stated maxim and is apparently quite dangerous in the hands of apologists.

You are over-generalizing. It's only useful to apologists in explaining BoM flora and fauna. In the case of the Spalding-Rigdon theory, the absence of evidence for pre-1830 contact between Joseph and Sidney is very much considered evidence of absence. The secret to being a good apologist is to pull this off with a straight face.

[thesometimesaint]

Ariarates:

Cute but misleading. There is no evidence that I've ever met George Washington in person. So by your logic I have not only met George Washington in person, but served with him as his aid in the Continental Army.

[Ariarates]

Ariarates:

Cute but misleading. There is no evidence that I've ever met George Washington in person. So by your logic I have not only met George Washington in person, but served with him as his aid in the Continental Army.

No, by my logic there is no evidence for BoM flora and fauna to have ever existed in the post-glacial, pre-Columbian Americas, so the BoM isn't historically accurate on these matters. Apologists disagree and say that the absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. However, if I say I think that Sidney Rigdon helped write the BoM, the apologists proclaim that there is no evidence of contact between Sidney and Joseph before 1830 and that such contact, therefore, probably didn't occur. In other words, in this case, the apologists say that the absence of evidence IS evidence of absence.

By the way, there is evidence that you never met GW in person. In the social hall, you indicated you were in your sixties (if I remember correctly), which would make GW worm food long before you were even born. Even if you lied about your age or I remembered incorrectly, you would have to be well over 200 years old to have known GW, so the odds of you having met him in person are rather slim. Of course, if you can believe in BoM historicity, anything is possible. The odds are about the same ;-)

[thesometimesaint]

Ariarates:

Like Barley?

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/transcripts/?id=126

[Ariarates]

Like Barley?

Yes, like barley.

Barley was first domesticated in the Fertile Crescent around 10,000 years ago. There was never any barley (wild or domesticated) in the Americas before Columbus. There was little barley, which is a very very very distant relative of "our" barley but we're talking millions of years here, so everybody who tries to pass off little barley as barley either doesn't know what they're talking about or intentionally tries to deceive their audience (your reference is a singular piece of crap, so I'm thinking it's an example of the former).

The problem with indigenous American grasses like little barley is that they have very small seeds (about one tenth of regular barley) and are not very attractive for domestication, therefore. Moreover, if memory serves, little barley as a food crop has only been traced to the US, which would give our Mesoamerican LGT believers a bit of a problem.

[Tarski]

Tarski:

Car makers test each an every car that comes off the assembly line.

I know what a random number is. Do you know what a representative sample is?

Is that an appeal to authority?

I just don't know what your problems is. A random sample of size n can be taken from a population of size N and n can be any number less than N.

One can take a random sample of 80 from a population of 100. No problem logically even if it seems silly in practice.

I get the feeling you didn't read the entire post and certainly didn't look at the arguments in the links.

What do you make of the statement ".. in probability theory, absence of evidence is always evidence of absence."??

Very simple the Dodo was limited in its range to the island of Mauritius.

a) So what? Every species has a certain limit range. Is there a magic size for ranges that allows absolute statements?

b) How do you know the Dodo was limited in it's range to the island of Mauritius? Did you or anyone else look in all other places on earth or even every square in of the island? (here I am teasingly throwing out the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" quip! See how silly? That's what you guys are doing with the horses and such.)

[Zakuska]

Ariarates:

Like Barley?

http://maxwellinstit...scripts/?id=126

Dontcha know thesometimessaint...?!

Yes, like barley.

Barley was first domesticated in the Fertile Crescent around 10,000 years ago. There was never any barley (wild or domesticated) in the Americas before Columbus. There was little barley, which is a very very very distant relative of "our" barley but we're talking millions of years here, so everybody who tries to pass off little barley as barley either doesn't know what they're talking about or intentionally tries to deceive their audience (your reference is a singular piece of crap, so I'm thinking it's an example of the former).

All those psuedo-scientists around the world (unlike Ariartis) only have half a brain in their head and besides they'er just a bunch of Mormon hacks anyways, and anything they write is a bunch of crap.

Comments: Little Barley is related to the Eurasian Hordeum vulgare (Cultivated Barley). Its appearance is somewhat similar to the awned variety of Cultivated Barley, except that Little Barley is smaller in size and it has shorter awns. Both of these species can be found in similar habitats (e.g., fallow fields and gravelly areas along railroads). The spike-like inflorescence of another species, Hordeum jubatum (Squirreltail Grass, Foxtail Barley), has a nodding habit and its silky awns are much longer than those of Little Barley. The most similar species in the state, Hordeum brachyantherum (Meadow Barley), is very rare in Illinois. All of the glumes of this perennial grass have a narrow bristle-like shape. In contrast, some of the glumes of Little Barley (as described above) are linear-lanceolate and noticeably widened toward their bases. Little Barley is one of the native plants that was cultivated by Amerindians in Illinois and other Midwestern states. Some of its seeds were stored during the fall and winter, planted during the spring, and harvested during the summer as a grain crop.

http://www.illinoisw...ttle_barley.htm

Did you notice how Ariartis "played down" the ancestry of Little Barley?

Also notice on this link that there is DNA evidence of a possible Barley domestication east of the Fertile crescent..

http://www.pnas.org/...104/9/3289.full

The problem with indigenous American grasses like little barley is that they have very small seeds (about one tenth of regular barley) and are not very attractive for domestication, therefore. Moreover, if memory serves, little barley as a food crop has only been traced to the US, which would give our Mesoamerican LGT believers a bit of a problem.

thesometimessaint,

Don't mind him... he's is desperatley out of date and out of touch with the scientific world...

Since the discovery among the Hohokam archaeological sites in Arizona in 1983, it has been discovered that little barley (Hordeum pussilum) is native to the Americas. It was first discovered in the

[maupayman]

This whole absence of evidence argument reminds me of the flying spaghetti monster argument. You can't prove that there isn't a flying spaghetti monster, despite the absence of evidence. We could find it tomorrow and you would look soooo foolish. Isn't the intellectually honest thing to say: "given the current evidence on the matter, the BoM does not appear to be an accurate representation of animal life existing in Mesoamerica during the given time periods". Same goes for the spaghetti monster. I'm open to this position changing, with the introduction of future evidence, but until that time lets tell it like it is. Its the best we can do.

[handys003]

Ariarates- if I told you the based on thousands of pottery chards on a bikini atoll in the S.E. Pacific of Melanesia and Asiatic roots in Polynesian language were evidence that Hawaiians were settled from the east vs. Historical genealogical history from Hulas and chants describing ancestors and sailing methods,astronomy, foods, animals, god, voyaging canoe building practices were handed down 2000 years as proof of Hawaiians came from the Land of Uru (West S. America). That was evidence of settlement from the west instead of east which would you choose?

[Dr. Jd]

You

[Ariarates]

Dontcha know thesometimessaint...?!

No, not personally. Is that important?

All those psuedo-scientists around the world (unlike Ariartis) only have half a brain in their head and besides they'er just a bunch of Mormon hacks anyways, and anything they write is a bunch of crap.

Whow, easy on the rethoric there. I didn

[Ariarates]

Ariarates- if I told you the based on thousands of pottery chards on a bikini atoll in the S.E. Pacific of Melanesia and Asiatic roots in Polynesian language were evidence that Hawaiians were settled from the east vs. Historical genealogical history from Hulas and chants describing ancestors and sailing methods,astronomy, foods, animals, god, voyaging canoe building practices were handed down 2000 years as proof of Hawaiians came from the Land of Uru (West S. America). That was evidence of settlement from the west instead of east which would you choose?

I don't understand half of what you are saying but it is my understanding that Hawaii was settled as part of the Austronesian expansion but I really don't know much about it, nor am I going to make up my mind based on two or three sentences on an internet forum (absolutely no offense intended).

[Ariarates]

my mom used apples with me when she taught me math.

I can tell. Still, thanks for trying.

[handys003]

I don't understand half of what you are saying but it is my understanding that Hawaii was settled as part of the Austronesian expansion but I really don't know much about it, nor am I going to make up my mind based on two or three sentences on an internet forum (absolutely no offense intended).

No offense taken besides I know your always polite and not confronting.

Anyhow my point of absence of evidence so to speak. The pottery chards are indicators of Lapita culture from S.E. Asia used by some along with Austronesian as evidence of East to West Migration. This would indicate proof of such theory correct? Well Hawaiian language lacks the "s" sound which is necessary for Asiatic root language in the Austronesian theory. Tribes before the Spanish influence also lacked the "s" sound. Ditto with the Rapa Nui. Also navigation techniques of the Polynesian in contrast with S. American natives are virtually the same in legend of star charts and sailing techniques and similar design in hulls of trans-oceanic voyaging canoes. Which would be considered truer? East to West or West to East. See where I'm going? East to West theorist are measuring and asserting such based on their version, and now adding Hawaiian chicken. Well the Hawaiian chicken could just as well came from S. America first. The fact that the East to West theory can be just as wrong based on inconclusive evidence. Much can compromised such as Fiji, the Solomons and Gilbert islands of Melanesia have DNA origins in Africa. Hawaiians and Rapa Nui having knowledge of S. America if they were coming from the East first and numerous more evidences, etc... Kind of an brief overview, but yet majority of Archaeologists prefer the East to West over the West to East based on so little to go on supporting such.

In light based on a minute amount of evidence sort of what your alluding toward toward BoM doing the same. My intent was to which you would of accepted as proof of theory. If you had maintained East to West i would have hammered you for taking a side with so little evidence making you seem hypocritical in light of how you present such in this thread. Sort of devilish to me to try to trap you. Sorry but I wanted to see how you would view such. Hope I didn't lose you on that. Sometimes I can be a stinker! Aloha!

[Dr.JD]

I can tell. Still, thanks for trying.

I'm sorry, I tried to make as simple as possible. But don't give up. I'm sure if you keep trying your reading comprehension will improve.

[Zakuska]

I don

[Zakuska]

Heres another Article on the Pecarries in Brazil.

Systems and costs of production for wild and domestic

species in South America

There has been interest in the raising of wild animals in farms in

various South American countries. The most recent data comes

from Brazil where there are estimates on the costs of farm-raising

capybara and peccary (Gama and Sequiera, 2004). There are

additional data on the potential of capybara farming from

Venezuela (Ojasti, 1991) and data from farming paca in Panama

(Smythe, 1991). A summary of this work with comments on the

difficulties of raising such animals is presented below.

<snip...>

Collared Peccary (Tayassu tajacu)

The interest in raising collared peccary appears to be for their

skins rather than their meat. There is a demand for peccary skins

in Europe and the USA. There are currently 21 official peccary

farms in Brazil. These farms use semi-intensive systems and use

land that is either of no useful agricultural purpose or in reserves,

which means the land has no commercial value.

The collared peccary also suffer like the capybara from infanticide.

However, unlike the capybara the adults do tolerate the presence

of young, immature animals. Box 1 presents the production

parameters for peccaries in captivity. Attempts to lower age at

first breeding and shorten time between litters have been

successful, but with a high cost in terms of viability of young.

The lower age at first parturition and the shorter inter-parturition

period means that the collared peccary requires far fewer follower

stock than the capybara. Therefore the fixed costs for this species

in terms of replacement are lower. However, estimates of the

total number of animals have not been made as the mortality

rates for young animals are very uncertain for the species in

wildlife farms. The advantage of their higher reproductive

efficiency could be quickly be removed if, say, 50% of their young

die and the culling rate of breeding animals is also high.

http://www.odi.org.u...wnload/2420.pdf

Did you notice that they are being "Breed" on these farms. That meets the definition of 'domestication'. (A defining characteristic of domestication is artificial selection by humans. )

They are much more expensive than pigs to breed. $3.46 vs $0.49.

[Ariarates]

No offense taken besides I know your always polite and not confronting.

Haha, this you say in post 65 after my post 64...

Anyhow my point of absence of evidence so to speak. The pottery chards are indicators of Lapita culture from S.E. Asia used by some along with Austronesian as evidence of East to West Migration. This would indicate proof of such theory correct? Well Hawaiian language lacks the "s" sound which is necessary for Asiatic root language in the Austronesian theory. Tribes before the Spanish influence also lacked the "s" sound. Ditto with the Rapa Nui. Also navigation techniques of the Polynesian in contrast with S. American natives are virtually the same in legend of star charts and sailing techniques and similar design in hulls of trans-oceanic voyaging canoes. Which would be considered truer? East to West or West to East. See where I'm going? East to West theorist are measuring and asserting such based on their version, and now adding Hawaiian chicken. Well the Hawaiian chicken could just as well came from S. America first. The fact that the East to West theory can be just as wrong based on inconclusive evidence. Much can compromised such as Fiji, the Solomons and Gilbert islands of Melanesia have DNA origins in Africa. Hawaiians and Rapa Nui having knowledge of S. America if they were coming from the East first and numerous more evidences, etc... Kind of an brief overview, but yet majority of Archaeologists prefer the East to West over the West to East based on so little to go on supporting such.

Again, I don't know much about it. In view of the fact that Hawaiian culture had no writing system until very late, I think it would be very difficult to determine which parts of the legends you mentioned originated when. Knowing what little I know about the subject, I think I would prefer the pottery evidence over the information from legends.

As for the s-sound, is Hawaiian a member of the Austronesian language family or is it a completely different language?

Hope I didn't lose you on that. Sometimes I can be a stinker!

No problem, I'm glad I passed the test.

[thesometimesaint]

Ariarates:

Little Barley is a type of Barley. Maybe not millions of years old. Probably just several thousands of years.

http://artsci.wustl.edu/~gjfritz/Hordeum_pusillum_Nutt.html

[Ariarates]

I showed 23 farms in Brazil who have domesticated Peccarys. (Contra your claim that pecarrys are impossible to domesticate)

No, you

[thesometimesaint]

Ariarates:

I see nowhere in the BoM where the Jaredites brought the elephant with them. Plus we already know that some species of elephant lived well past the arrival of the Jaredites in the new world. In fact are still alive today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_elephant

[Ariarates]

Little Barley is a type of Barley.

No, they are distinct species of the same genus.

Maybe not millions of years old. Probably just several thousands of years.

I'd have to look it up to be precise but I'm pretty sure the Hordeum genus is several millions of years old. Domestication of barley, on the other hand, is of course relatively recent (again from memory, I'd say between 8 and 10,000 years BC).

[Ariarates]

I see nowhere in the BoM where the Jaredites brought the elephant with them.

Neither do I. But if there were no elephants in the Americas during BoM times, as most scientists think, they must have been brought along by the Jaredites (barring supernatural explanations).

Plus we already know that some species of elephant lived well past the arrival of the Jaredites in the new world. In fact are still alive today.

People, if you're not going to read what I write (that elephants became extinct in the Americas before BoM times), at least bother to read your own references and follow a link or two.

[thesometimesaint]

Ariarates:

With regards to your claim that Little Barley is not a type of Barley that is a distinction without much of a difference.

Again I have not claimed we have found evidence for the elephant in the Americas in the correct time frame of the Jaredites. There is nothing in the BoM of how prevalent they were. I assume you are aware of the finding of Troy a little over a century ago. We have literally just scratched the surface of Mesoamerica. Your flat out denial of the possibility of elephants in BoM Times is premature at best.