Dna Of Ice Age Infant Fills In Native American Ancestry

[ALarson]

I am still reading information that others have given me here regarding the most recent essay on DNA and the Book of Mormon.  I found this story published today doing some searches online for more information.  I'd love any feedback from those who are interested in reading it:

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/ice-age-infants-genome-fills-native-american-ancestry-n28176

 

Here are a couple of quotes from the article:

 

The researchers compared the Clovis infant's DNA to several other modern and ancient genomes, including a 4,000-year-old sample from Greenland and a 7,000-year-old sample from Spain, a 24,000-year-old sample from another young lad who was buried on the banks of Lake Baikal in Siberia, Russia. Anzick-1’s closest relationship was with the Siberian youth — who, researchers showed in February this year, is genetically linked with Native Americans today.

 

 

Also, Anzick-1 is most closely genetically related to tribes living in North America, but also to Native Americans in Central and South America. An older lineage split, some time between 13,000 and 24,000 years ago into two, his sequencing data indicates: One that gave rise to the Clovis and Native Americans today, and a second lineage, from which the Central and South American tribes descended.

 

 

[mfbukowski]

Though this is scientific news, I don't think it has any implications for the BOM, which is why, I suppose this thread was started.

I am a proponent of the idea that other peoples were on the continent before Lehi & Company arrived on the scene.

The idea that no one else ever crossed the Atlantic in hundreds of thousands of years of human history is beyond unbelievable to me. You look at the Polynesian peoples with the incredible feats of seamanship they showed, the Vikings, the Greeks, who knows who else could have made it?

I am sure there were all kinds of peoples here from both Asia and Europe, and clearly those we call "Nephites" could easily have been one such very small immigration.

So it's an interesting article, but it's hard to see why it has any implications for a Mormon context.

[MichelleD]

Wow they can sequence the DNA of a child that lived 12,600 years ago? That was fascinating to read through! It was also really interesting that they found some of the actual tools that were used back then too. Looking at the pictures of these tools was also interesting. Thanks for the link!

[JulieM]

Wow they can sequence the DNA of a child that lived 12,600 years ago? That was fascinating to read through!

For those members of the church who believe that the world is only 6,000 years old may have issues with this. Just sayin.....

[mfbukowski]

For those members of the church who believe that the world is only 6,000 years old may have issues with this. Just sayin.....

Hey, around here, we all have issues with everything. 

 

Welcome to the bored.   No, that's not a spelling error. 

[JulieM]

Hey, around here, we all have issues with everything. 

 

Welcome to the bored.   No, that's not a spelling error. 

Thank you! I've enjoyed reading the diverse comments on here and thought I'd join in.

My views on the whole 6,000 year old world belief are changing (thanks to some well expressed comments on here as that played a big part in my change). That's why I made the observation that I did here. Thanks again for the welcome, you're very kind.

[Tacenda]

Thank you! I've enjoyed reading the diverse comments on here and thought I'd join in.

My views on the whole 6,000 year old world belief are changing (thanks to some well expressed comments on here as that played a big part in my change). That's why I made the observation that I did here. Thanks again for the welcome, you're very kind.

Yeah, welcome Julie M. Glad you're here!

[Robert F. Smith]

I am still reading information that others have given me here regarding the most recent essay on DNA and the Book of Mormon.  I found this story published today doing some searches online for more information.  I'd love any feedback from those who are interested in reading it:

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/ice-age-infants-genome-fills-native-american-ancestry-n28176

 

Here are a couple of quotes from the article:

This is a very rare opportunity.  Due to the Federal law called NAGPRA for short, nearly none of the available skeletal remains in archeological digs in the USA are examined for DNA.  Virtually all are and must be immediately turned over to a local Amerind tribe for secret burial.  Only outside the USA are ancient skeletal remains available for actual research of any kind, which means that we do not have an adequate sampling.

 

This particular burial is actually quite late, as is all Clovis evidence.  Humans were already in the Americas at around 10,000 years earlier.

[Storm Rider]

Just an aside, it has always been puzzling why we acknowledge any group for being "native" to a land. It would appear there are no "native" people. There are earlier immigrants to a land, but there does not appear to be any First People.  Yet, some groups and tribes attempt to define themselves as First People and their tribal lore also supports this position.  Just an thought. 

[CMZ]

Just an aside, it has always been puzzling why we acknowledge any group for being "native" to a land. It would appear there are no "native" people. There are earlier immigrants to a land, but there does not appear to be any First People.  Yet, some groups and tribes attempt to define themselves as First People and their tribal lore also supports this position.  Just an thought. 

 

Exactly.

[katherine the great]

This is a very rare opportunity.  Due to the Federal law called NAGPRA for short, nearly none of the available skeletal remains in archeological digs in the USA are examined for DNA.  Virtually all are and must be immediately turned over to a local Amerind tribe for secret burial.  Only outside the USA are ancient skeletal remains available for actual research of any kind, which means that we do not have an adequate sampling.

 

Ugh.  I hate working with NAGPRA...

[thesometimesaint]

Thank you! I've enjoyed reading the diverse comments on here and thought I'd join in.

My views on the whole 6,000 year old world belief are changing (thanks to some well expressed comments on here as that played a big part in my change). That's why I made the observation that I did here. Thanks again for the welcome, you're very kind.

 

Welcome to the glass menagerie.

[Robert F. Smith]

Just an aside, it has always been puzzling why we acknowledge any group for being "native" to a land. It would appear there are no "native" people. There are earlier immigrants to a land, but there does not appear to be any First People.  Yet, some groups and tribes attempt to define themselves as First People and their tribal lore also supports this position.  Just an thought. 

That is why anthropologists call them Amerindians (Amerinds), due to the mistaken belief of Columbus that he had reached India.

[Gray]

Just an aside, it has always been puzzling why we acknowledge any group for being "native" to a land. It would appear there are no "native" people. There are earlier immigrants to a land, but there does not appear to be any First People.  Yet, some groups and tribes attempt to define themselves as First People and their tribal lore also supports this position.  Just an thought. 

 

Well, they were the first people to arrive here, so it seems to make sense. 

 

"Native" also makes sense since they were here for so long before western encroachment 

Edited February 14, 2014 by Gray

[ERayR]

For those members of the church who believe that the world is only 6,000 years old may have issues with this. Just sayin.....

 

In my circle of friends (in and out of the 'LDS' Church) literally nobody believes in a 6,000 year world history.  Oh by the way that is a large circle and not limited to my present residential area.  Just sayin....

[ALarson]

In my circle of friends (in and out of the 'LDS' Church) literally nobody believes in a 6,000 year world history.  Oh by the way that is a large circle and not limited to my present residential area.  Just sayin....

If I read her post correctly, JulieM agrees with you.

[ERayR]

If I read her post correctly, JulieM agrees with you.

 

OK, all is good.

[strappinglad]

Please remember that those are 6000 symbolic years of 360 figurative days of 24 mythical hours.

 

Also recall that the church wandered in the wilderness for 3.5 years / 42 months /1260 days which stand for 1260 prophetic years of apostasy . It's all in the Bible you know.

Edited February 15, 2014 by strappinglad

[strappinglad]

I find it a bit arrogant to say that the DNA of one infant now "fills in " 10,000 plus years of ancestry . That's like saying we have a few pieces of a 1500 piece puzzle and now we can see the entire picture.