Latest On The Kennewick Man

[cdowis]

del 

Edited November 19, 2014 by cdowis

[Robert F. Smith]

See further at http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/kennewick-man-finally-freed-share-his-secrets-180952462/#vxPXdyhlg5CVzTo9.99 .

 

Also, read Owsley, Douglas W., and Richard L. Jantz, eds., Kennewick Man: The Scientific Investigation of an Ancient American Skeleton, Peopling of the Americas Publications (Texas A&M Univ. Press, 2014).

Edited November 13, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Avatar4321]

There you go. A government conspiracy to stop any scientific Inquiry that could lead to positive evidence for the Book of Mormon.

btw I'm jk. And the find is fascinating on a number of levels.

[The Nehor]

So it is not Lord Xenu?

[strappinglad]

Don't you just love it when politics trumps science. BTW 2 million pounds of dirt sounds like a lot but in reality that's only 1000 tons and could be removed in a couple of days if desired. ACE gives scientists 16 days to investigate, my how accommodating.

[cdowis]

del

Edited November 19, 2014 by cdowis

[Robert F. Smith]

There you go. A government conspiracy to stop any scientific Inquiry that could lead to positive evidence for the Book of Mormon.

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

Certainly doesn't fit within the preconceptions of Simon Southerton and Dr. Thomas Murphy (and their friends).

 

Oh, "why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?" (Psalm 2:1).

[Rivers]

I served in the Washington, Kennewick mission.  I remember my mission president had to make the point that the Kennewick man couldn't really be 9,000 years old since the earth is only 6,000 years old.

[katherine the great]

I served in the Washington, Kennewick mission. I remember my mission president had to make the point that the Kennewick man couldn't really be 9,000 years old since the earth is only 6,000 years old.

Haha! That's awesome!

[SmileyMcGee]

I served in the Washington, Kennewick mission. I remember my mission president had to make the point that the Kennewick man couldn't really be 9,000 years old since the earth is only 6,000 years old.

And that is why we have the necessary evil that is correlation.

[cdowis]

del 

Edited November 19, 2014 by cdowis

[Robert F. Smith]

Yes, we recognize that chronology is a major issue between science and the LDS religion that remains unresolved.

I don't agree.  Opinions differ markedly on just what the LDS faith holds as the actual age of the Earth.  I don't see that there is a real issue of science versus Mormonism.  Perhaps you could show us how you see it.

[strappinglad]

Dating, whether it be radiometric or internet, is built upon assumptions. Some are reasonable, some not so much.

[cdowis]

del 

Edited November 19, 2014 by cdowis

[Robert F. Smith]

Not talking about the age of the earth, but when the first homo sapiens first appeared on the scene.  Please look at the context of my remarks.

 

Did homo sapiens live on the earth 10K years ago?  Is that consistent with LDS belief regarding Adam.

Kerry Shirts discussed this basic issue several years ago online at http://www.backyardprofessor.com/the_backyard_professor/2011/01/dc-77-young-earth-or-old-earth.html .

 

The LDS Church has never taken an official position on how long each of the six days of Creation lasted, so that the periods could easily cover the 4.5 billion years estimated by geologists.  Moreover, the Church has never given an opinion on the age or relationship of the various forms of hominids to Adam.  The Church has never mentioned homo sapiens sapiens or Neanderthals.  There is a 1909 First Presidency Letter saying:

 

It is held by some that Adam was not the first man upon this earth and that the original human being was a development from lower orders of the animal creation. These, however, are the theories of men. The word of the Lord declared that Adam was "the first man of all men" (Moses 1:34), and we are therefore in duty bound to regard him as the primal parent of our race.  See Improvement Era, Nov 1909, 75–81.

 

However, one is hard pressed to estimate how long after his "creation" Adam lived in the Garden before the Fall.  Indeed, since so much else in the Creation and Garden story is figurative, including the generic name of adam "man," that one might just as well ask whether we are dealing with a science and history text in Genesis 1 - 3, or with a temple ritual text celebrating a time of innocence -- which comes to an end with the Fall, and begins a very different sequence of events.  The Church does not object to the teaching in CES/BYU of evolutionary biology, the existence of early hominids, or of a very old Earth.  "Theories of men," yes, but allowed to simmer and remain for all of us to deal with in our own way.  See Hugh Nibley, "Before Adam," April 1, 1980, online at http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=997&index=1 .

[cdowis]

del

Edited November 19, 2014 by cdowis

[sunstoned]

Certainly doesn't fit within the preconceptions of Simon Southerton and Dr. Thomas Murphy (and their friends).

 

Oh, "why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?" (Psalm 2:1).

This doesn't change anything that Simon has written about.  This person was a traveler as evidenced by his diet.  what this does say is there is evidence that people had the ability to make long sea voyages much earlier that science had thought.   There is also evidence of tribes in Southern California having been visited by Polynesian voyagers. Interesting stuff.  

[katherine the great]

Let's get this very clear.

 

The earth, from the day Adam left the Garden, will last for 7,000 years.  Adam did not have any children before leaving the garden.  Presumably Adam was the first homo sapiens -- we are his children, and he is the ancestor to every individual in this earth today.

 

So, again assuming Kennewick man is homo sapiens, he was a descendant of Adam, and was born sometime AFTER Adam left the garden about 6000 years ago.

 

Hopefully this is now clear.  It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the age of the earth.

If Adam left the garden 7,000 years ago then he was not the first Homo sapien.  

[cdowis]

del 

Edited November 19, 2014 by cdowis

[strappinglad]

I would be interested to know what method(s) was(were) used to arrive at the 9000 years date. I assume that Kennewick-san was tested with radiocarbon dating but with only 16 days to run tests and with the bones moved so many times and kept in what seems to be less than ideal conditions ,there may be room for error.

[LinuxGal]

There you go. A government conspiracy to stop any scientific Inquiry that could lead to positive evidence for the Book of Mormon.

 

 

They realized Kennewick Man wasn't of approved ancestry, which threatened the narrative that the same folks currently billed as "original inhabitants" owned the Americas, lock, stock, and barrel.  But I don't think they did it with the CoJCoLDS in mind.

[katherine the great]

I would be interested to know what method(s) was(were) used to arrive at the 9000 years date. I assume that Kennewick-san was tested with radiocarbon dating but with only 16 days to run tests and with the bones moved so many times and kept in what seems to be less than ideal conditions ,there may be room for error.

The collagen was extracted from hand and foot bones and a tibia.  Once the collagen is extracted, it doesn't matter how many times the bones are moved.

[katherine the great]

They realized Kennewick Man wasn't of approved ancestry, which threatened the narrative that the same folks currently billed as "original inhabitants" owned the Americas, lock, stock, and barrel.  But I don't think they did it with the CoJCoLDS in mind.

I agree.  The issue is with NAGPRA and more specifically, the native tribes that now inhabit the area.  The scientists are saying, "This guy is not one of you, therefore you cannot claim ancestry" and the tribes are saying, "This guy is located on our ancestral lands and so he IS one of us."  NAGPRA is a pushback against all of the unconscionable work archaeologists and "treasure seekers" used to do that was utterly disrespectful of of Native Americans and the dead in general.  Its too bad we can't find a happy medium, but we are paying the price for the misdeeds of our forerunners.

[Thinking]

The LDS Church has never taken an official position on how long each of the six days of Creation lasted, so that the periods could easily cover the 4.5 billion years estimated by geologists.  Moreover, the Church has never given an opinion on the age or relationship of the various forms of hominids to Adam.

 

Decay doesn't begin until the death of the body. If there was no death during the creative periods, then the story of the fall of Adam contradicts the science of dating.

 

Latter-day revelation teaches that there was no death on this earth before the Fall of Adam. Indeed, death entered the world as a direct result of the Fall. Link

[Robert F. Smith]

Decay doesn't begin until the death of the body. If there was no death during the creative periods, then the story of the fall of Adam contradicts the science of dating.

No it doesn't, unless you believe that the only hominids ever created were Adam & Eve, and unless you assume that the Garden of Eden is a closed structure apart from which nothing else existed (which contradicts Scripture -- when they are ejected from the Garden of immortality, they go to a cruel, outside world which already existed), and unless you reject the Law of Entropy.  Who told you that there was no death during the long creative periods?  The circus doesn't start until the MC says so, but there is already plenty of action along the midway.