Johnnie Cake Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) On January 25, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Hamba Tuhan said: No, not really. What you've essentially been saying is that a) you've figured out in your head what Nephite material culture should look like, and b) since none of this imagined evidence has yet been found, this should be seen as proof that Nephites really didn't exist. Neither of these points matches what archaeology is or does. You're stuck on "should"...while I'm at "does". Does any of the ancient American artifacts discovered so far support the existence of a Nephite, lamanites or jaradites civilization? If yes, where is it? If no, then why should I believe any of them ever existed Edited January 26, 2016 by Johnnie Cake
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 6 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: Does any of the ancient American artifacts discovered so far support the existence of a Nephite, lamanites or jaradites civilization? This question indicates that you still do not really grasp what archaeology is or does. So be it. Quote If no, then why should I believe any of them ever existed[?] Clearly, you shouldn't. But please don't keep insisting that this conclusion is because the archaeology that you don't understand requires it. 4
volgadon Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 Km 1 hour ago, Gervin said: You're in Tiberias? I've stayed a few times at the YMCA that sits a few miles north on the right. Great place to swim. I'm from a small village several miles north of Tiberias, actually, but you are right about the great swimming.
bcuzbcuz Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 On 25 January 2016 at 1:24 AM, volgadon said: It is less that he did not identify Lachish and more that his positive identification failed utterly. This was Tel el-Hesi, site of his aforementioned first dig in Palestine. His expedition's goal was to excavate Lachish, and he chose el-Hesi on the strength of a few pottery shards and the somewhat-similar name of a nearby Arab village. He was convinced that this was Lachish, and that became the consensus until the Lachish letters were discovered. For all his merits as a methodical archaeologist, he was pretty sloppy when it came to the identity of sites. In this case, it was definitely a leap based on faulty assumptions about what pottery shards can actually tell us, something rather relevant to this discussion.To this day, no one has convincingly establish Tel el-Hesi's identity and history. You would think that at least establishing the latter would be a snap if your explanation of the Flinders Petrie method were sound. I'm not sure this is the case, as the method depends on the assumption that the ceramic cultures of the various peoples of the ancient Near East developed similarly. In other words, that the similarities outweigh the differences. Because of this similar evolution, the chronology of various layers of settlement can be synchronised. The method is not as helpful for interpreting differences between cultures and establishing their identities. Pottery catalogues are probably closer to what you are arguing, but although both are important for the other, a lot more goes into cataloguing than serification. At the very least, the diffusion theory inherent in the method can be challenged, and that is a serious challenge. There is a reason that things like pig bones are considered more helpful in establishing ethnic identity than ceramics when it comes to questions like identifying early Israelites. Interesting that you use the idea of pig bones being more helpful than other methods to identifying cultures. Read The biblical prohibition against the consumption of pork (Lev 11:7; Deut 14:8), observed in Judaism for over two millennia, is the reason for the special attention paid to the appearance of pig bones in Iron Age strata in the southern Levant 1. Scholars have assumed that archae- ology can shed light on the date of the emergence of this taboo, its role in the shaping of Israelite identity and its function in forming cultural boundaries with neighboring cultures. HESSE reviewed the zooarchaeological data and demonstrated that pig frequencies at sites from the Iron Age are very low, except for Philistine sites, which showed a dramatic increase in pig bones in the Iron Age I 2. Yet HESSE and WAPNISH concluded that, due to the diverse factors influencing pig frequencies, the absence/presence of this species is insufficient to distinguish between groups of different ethnic origins 3. The absence of pig bones at Iron Age I sites in the highlands and their exceptional abundance at contemporaneous Philistian sites had an enormous impact and scholars assumed that all early Israelites did not consume pork throughout the Iron Age 4. FINKELSTEIN argued that the absence / presence of pigs may be the only way to shed light on ethnic boundaries in the Iron Age I 5. However, the accumulation of new data in the 20 years following these influential articles has revealed new and intriguing patterns regarding pig husbandry in the Iron Age, placing the older assumptions regarding pig consumption in the Iron Age in ques- tion. By reviewing the new data, we wish to question the notion that pork consumption is a way to distinguish Israelites/Canaanites from Philistines. In this essay, we demonstrate that pigs do not appear (or appear in small number) in Iron Age I Canaanite centers in the lowlands as well as in non-urban settlements within the presumed territory of the Philistine city-states. Yet, the data collected demonstrate that dichotomy in pig consumption did occur – between sites located in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah during the Iron Age IIB. The data, presented here for the first time, call for a reevaluation of the origin of the biblical taboo on the consumption of pork . This quote comes from , https://www.academia.edu/4062281/Pig_Husbandry_in_Iron_Age_Israel_and_Judah Read and enjoy
Johnnie Cake Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) 12 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said: This question indicates that you still do not really grasp what archaeology is or does. So be it. Clearly, you shouldn't. But please don't keep insisting that this conclusion is because the archaeology that you don't understand requires it. I'm calling you out.. Hamba...It is YOU who has demonstrated no grasp of what archaeology is or does and your refusal to answer a simple question is my proof. Your bias comes through...it is blinding you and keeping you from being able to see clearly. You can continue to try and avoid answering my question by trying to continuously diverting attention away from the question by trying to marginalize me to draw attention away from the question by suggesting that my questions are rooted in archaeological ignorance. Well I'm calling Bull Crap. The reason you refuse to answer the question is because the answer is NO, there is NONE. No outliers, no black swans nothing that would lead an archeologist to conclude through an analysis of the evidence that they are digging up anything other than the artifacts of indigenous native American civilizations. The hill you have built and the one you are going to die on is the premise that every artifact ever discovered is in fact a misidentified Book of Mormon artifact thus co-opting the art, industry and cultures of indigenous American civilizations to serve your own desire for belief. So let me ask you another question using your logic.. Is there any reason not to conclude that the artifacts discovered in the Americas were not the product of space aliens who merely abandanded their space alien culture and adobted the culture of the indigenous civilizations that they found upon landing in the Americas in their space ship? Aren't all of the artifacts found in todays museums the products of these space aliens...just mislabled? Surely there is just as much support for this bizarre claim as there is to support your premis that Book of Mormon civilizations abandoned their native bronze aged cultures, the helpful technologies of the wheel, smelting and casting of metals and instead adobted the stone aged cultures of the people they supposedly merged with in the Americas. At least Volgadon had the integrity to admit that he believes that Book of Mormon claimed civilizations did just that...abandoned their old world culture and adopted the new world culture that allegedly merged with in this new Book of Mormon world view Edited January 26, 2016 by Johnnie Cake
thesometimesaint Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 19 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: Argument from ignorance. I'm calling you out.. Hamba...It is YOU who has no grasp of what archaeology is or does and your refusal to answer a simple question is my proof. Your bias come through...it is blinding you and keeping you from being able to see clearly. You can continue to try and avoid answering my question by trying to diverting attention away from the question by trying to marginalize me in order to draw attention away from the question and suggest that my questions are rooted in archaeological ignorance. Well I'm calling Bull Crap. The reason you refuse to answer the question is because the answer is NO, there is NONE. No outliers, no black swans nothing that would lead an archeologist to conclude that they are digging up anything but the artifacts of indigenous native American civilizations. The hill you have built and the one you are going to die on is the premise that every artifact ever discovered is in fact a misidentified Book of Mormon artifact thus co-opting the art, industry and cultures of indigenous American civilizations to serve your own desire for belief. So let me ask you another question using your logic.. Is there any reason not to conclude that the artifacts discovered in the Americas were not the product of space aliens who merely abandanded their space alien culture and adobted the culture of the indigenous civilizations that they found upon landing in the Americas in their space ship? Aren't all of the artifacts found in todays museums the products of these space aliens...just mislabled? Surely there is just as much support for this bizarre claim as there is to support your premis that Book of Mormon civilizations abandoned their native bronze aged cultures, the helpful technologies of the wheel, smelting and casting of metals and instead adobted the stone aged cultures of the people they supposedly merged with in the Americas. At least Volgadon had the integrity to admit that he believes that Book of Mormon claimed civilizations did just that...abandoned their old world culture and adopted the new world culture that allegedly merged with in this new Book of Mormon world view Argument from Ignorance. SEE http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/12/131208-roanoke-lost-colony-discovery-history-raleigh/ 1
rodheadlee Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 All of my pottery says made in China on it. 2 thousand years from now how do you think that will be interpreted? 1
Johnnie Cake Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) What was it that caused archaeologists to conclude that the site they were digging in at L'Anse aux Meadows was NOT the product of the native populations? Evidence? How could these scientist distinguish between the native populations and those of some alien, non native influence? Evidence? Why would they eventually conclude that the site was the result of an incursion by Vikings into North America? Evidence. How could this be? Why didn't these Vikings abandon their own bronze aged culture and adopt the inferior culture of the native populations they possibly encountered? Don't Old world cultures abandon their superior cultures when they encounter inferior cultures? Certainly this is the logic you are putting forth for your BoM migrations. But if the Book of Mormon civilizations did...why didn't the Vikings? For the record...I don't know exactly what you THINK Archaeology is but most people would agree with this definition: Quote Archaeology is the study of human history and prehistory through the excavation of sites and the analysis of artifacts and other physical remains If your definition of archaeology is somehow different...then please enlighten me. If it is the same than please disengage with your diversion tactics Does any of the ancient American artifacts discovered so far support the existence of a Nephite, Lamanites or Jaradites civilization? If yes, where is it? If no, then why should I believe any of them ever existed. It is through the analysis of the artifacts and other physical remains of Ancient American civilizations that archaeology has never found artifacts or physical remains that would support the incursion of a non-native population into the Americas from the middle east. There is nothing to support the premise of any Book of Mormon civilization, in other words every archaeological find has been attributed to the native populations. In fact every pre-Columbian archaeological dig, with the exception to the afore mentioned Viking dig, has been attributed to the native population. Does this preclude some future discovery that analysis of the physical remains may attribute to a Book of Mormon civilization...no, that always remains a possibility...and that my friend is where Book of Mormon archaeology exists...in the hope of some yet to be discovered artifact, or physical remains. but lets at least be honest with what has been discovered to date and give honest accreditation to the peoples who created them. Edited January 26, 2016 by Johnnie Cake
Gray Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 There is no real archaeological evidence that the Nephites existed. So the question remains largely theological. 2
Kevin Christensen Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 And, of course, I remain fond of these interesting Mesoamerican artifacts, as compared to the Anthon transcript: http://www.shields-research.org/General/SEHA/SEHA_Newsletter_122-2.PDF Worth a repeat since the first try didn't generate any comments. Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA 1
volgadon Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 3 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said: Interesting that you use the idea of pig bones being more helpful than other methods to identifying cultures. Read The biblical prohibition against the consumption of pork (Lev 11:7; Deut 14:8), observed in Judaism for over two millennia, is the reason for the special attention paid to the appearance of pig bones in Iron Age strata in the southern Levant 1. Scholars have assumed that archae- ology can shed light on the date of the emergence of this taboo, its role in the shaping of Israelite identity and its function in forming cultural boundaries with neighboring cultures. HESSE reviewed the zooarchaeological data and demonstrated that pig frequencies at sites from the Iron Age are very low, except for Philistine sites, which showed a dramatic increase in pig bones in the Iron Age I 2. Yet HESSE and WAPNISH concluded that, due to the diverse factors influencing pig frequencies, the absence/presence of this species is insufficient to distinguish between groups of different ethnic origins 3. The absence of pig bones at Iron Age I sites in the highlands and their exceptional abundance at contemporaneous Philistian sites had an enormous impact and scholars assumed that all early Israelites did not consume pork throughout the Iron Age 4. FINKELSTEIN argued that the absence / presence of pigs may be the only way to shed light on ethnic boundaries in the Iron Age I 5. However, the accumulation of new data in the 20 years following these influential articles has revealed new and intriguing patterns regarding pig husbandry in the Iron Age, placing the older assumptions regarding pig consumption in the Iron Age in ques- tion. By reviewing the new data, we wish to question the notion that pork consumption is a way to distinguish Israelites/Canaanites from Philistines. In this essay, we demonstrate that pigs do not appear (or appear in small number) in Iron Age I Canaanite centers in the lowlands as well as in non-urban settlements within the presumed territory of the Philistine city-states. Yet, the data collected demonstrate that dichotomy in pig consumption did occur – between sites located in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah during the Iron Age IIB. The data, presented here for the first time, call for a reevaluation of the origin of the biblical taboo on the consumption of pork . This quote comes from , https://www.academia.edu/4062281/Pig_Husbandry_in_Iron_Age_Israel_and_Judah Read and enjoy You really ought to read the entire thing. The paper explains that the picture of pig husbandry is complicated, but the authors continue to use and even recommend it as an identity marker. Note that they don't recommend seriation as a better alternative in this context. Of course using pig husbandry I neither perfect nor conclusive. That I why I did not use the superlative and said more helpful rather than most helpful. 1
stemelbow Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 11 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said: And, of course, I remain fond of these interesting Mesoamerican artifacts, as compared to the Anthon transcript: http://www.shields-research.org/General/SEHA/SEHA_Newsletter_122-2.PDF Worth a repeat since the first try didn't generate any comments. Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA I don't know about others, but I see this and kinda go, "Ok. What's does this really mean?" I'm curious if there is any depiction of the two whole pieces side by side, rather than by character by character. That may help. It's hard to see this as evidence of much if we don't have any idea what either say.
volgadon Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 1 hour ago, Johnnie Cake said: I'm calling you out.. Hamba...It is YOU who has no grasp of what archaeology is or does and your refusal to answer a simple question is my proof. Your bias comes through...it is blinding you and keeping you from being able to see clearly. You can continue to try and avoid answering my question by trying to diverting attention away from the question by trying to marginalize me in order to draw attention away from the question and suggest that my questions are rooted in archaeological ignorance. Well I'm calling Bull Crap. The reason you refuse to answer the question is because the answer is NO, there is NONE. No outliers, no black swans nothing that would lead an archeologist to conclude that they are digging up anything but the artifacts of indigenous native American civilizations. The hill you have built and the one you are going to die on is the premise that every artifact ever discovered is in fact a misidentified Book of Mormon artifact thus co-opting the art, industry and cultures of indigenous American civilizations to serve your own desire for belief. So let me ask you another question using your logic.. Is there any reason not to conclude that the artifacts discovered in the Americas were not the product of space aliens who merely abandanded their space alien culture and adobted the culture of the indigenous civilizations that they found upon landing in the Americas in their space ship? Aren't all of the artifacts found in todays museums the products of these space aliens...just mislabled? Surely there is just as much support for this bizarre claim as there is to support your premis that Book of Mormon civilizations abandoned their native bronze aged cultures, the helpful technologies of the wheel, smelting and casting of metals and instead adobted the stone aged cultures of the people they supposedly merged with in the Americas. At least Volgadon had the integrity to admit that he believes that Book of Mormon claimed civilizations did just that...abandoned their old world culture and adopted the new world culture that allegedly merged with in this new Book of Mormon world view If Hamba Tuhan chooses toset you straight it will be epic, though he probably won't as it would be a waste of time with you. You still don't get very basic concepts of archaeolog, sorry to be blunt. 2
thesometimesaint Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 45 minutes ago, Gray said: There is no real archaeological evidence that the Nephites existed. So the question remains largely theological. Tautology.
Gray Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 7 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Tautology. Not really, no.
volgadon Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 The Norse colonies in Vinland did not exist fore more than a few years.
thesometimesaint Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 6 minutes ago, Gray said: Not really, no. Yes it is a tautology. You don't accept the evidence. So the Nephites couldn't have existed. We have evidence for the Nephites, beyond just a theological discussion. Convincing evidence is a different question. SEE http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml
Johnnie Cake Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) I want to reiterate that using your logic, Hamba Tuhan, There is just as much support to conclude that aliens from space created the artifacts falsely accredited to the Aztec, Olmec, Inca and Mayan civilizations as there is to conclude that some how they were made by Nephites, Lamanites of Jaradites...wouldn't you agree? Its ok to admit that there is nothing to support a Nephite civilization and instead suggest that you theorize that the Nephites abandoned their culture and adopted the prevailing cultures of Central America in such a manner that in doing so made the Nephite artifacts indistinguishable from the native populations they supposedly merged with while abandoning old world technologies...if that is where you want to lay your head be my guest....but just know that it then places you in the same camp claiming that this same process was used by a small group of space aliens migrating from space who abandoned their space technologies, merged with the native populations, adopted their stone age culture in such a manner that their native alien space culture became indistinguishable from the native populations. But if we're going to remain in the world of the analysis of archaeological evidence...where does that lead us? To space aliens? To a middle eastern migration? Or to cultures that were fully capable of creating their own cultures without any outside influences...space alien or otherwise? Edited January 26, 2016 by Johnnie Cake
Gray Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 (edited) 32 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Yes it is a tautology. You don't accept the evidence. So the Nephites couldn't have existed. We have evidence for the Nephites, beyond just a theological discussion. Convincing evidence is a different question. SEE http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml It's not that I have rejected evidence. It's that there is no real archaeological evidence for Nephites. You can find isolated convergences for just about anything, up to and including ancient aliens. But that's not really what I'm talking about. The arguments (based on archaeology) for evidences of the existence of the Nephites don't rise above the level of background noise. The evidence for the existence of the Maya, on the other hand, is massive, well-supported and conclusive. Or to put it this way - there aren't really any non-theological reasons to suppose that Nephites ever existed. Edited January 26, 2016 by Gray 1
volgadon Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 Faulty logic. Just because A can establish neither B nor C it does not follow that C has as much support for it as B. If B is earthly civilization known only from literary remains and C is an alien civilization known from neither literary nor physical remains, then B is going to have more support and more evidence than C. You are of course welcome to believe in your alien theory and it cannot be disproved, but the evidence is weaker. Thus your deliberately absurd comparison flops on its face. 1
Gray Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 3 minutes ago, volgadon said: Faulty logic. Just because A can establish neither B nor C it does not follow that C has as much support for it as B. If B is earthly civilization known only from literary remains and C is an alien civilization known from neither literary nor physical remains, then B is going to have more support and more evidence than C. You are of course welcome to believe in your alien theory and it cannot be disproved, but the evidence is weaker. Thus your deliberately absurd comparison flops on its face. The problem here is that we have no confirmed literary artifacts from the Nephites. 1
Kevin Christensen Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 47 minutes ago, stemelbow said: I don't know about others, but I see this and kinda go, "Ok. What's does this really mean?" I'm curious if there is any depiction of the two whole pieces side by side, rather than by character by character. That may help. It's hard to see this as evidence of much if we don't have any idea what either say. It is evidence from Book of Mormon times and settings of the use of a set of symbols resembling the set of symbols on the Anthon manuscript. Knowing what they say would be enlightening, and yes there are photographs of the cylinders in the literature. If you don't think of them as evidence of anything much, then explain the elaborate comparative relationship between many symbols on very different documents coming from different times, places, and cultures, without invoking the phrase "just a coincidence." The cylinder seals represent a significant anomaly for the thesis that there is not evidence for Book of Mormon peoples in Mesoamerica. You might prefer more evidence, or bigger evidence. I happen to believe that there is more and bigger evidence, thanks to having read Sorenson, Gardner, Clark, Wirth, Christenson, Wright, and others. Alma 32, I notice, distinguished between that which conveys absolute certain knowledge, and that which supports "cause to believe" that falls short of absolute certain knowledge. FWIW Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA
mfbukowski Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 14 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: You're stuck on "should"...while I'm at "does". Does any of the ancient American artifacts discovered so far support the existence of a Nephite, lamanites or jaradites civilization? If yes, where is it? If no, then why should I believe any of them ever existed CFR that anyone SHOULD take that position, when it contradicts your own position that there is a problem with "should" I am serious. I want a reference showing that ethically or otherwise that one SHOULD hold that position and why. This is a religious discussion. I want evidence for why someone should believer YOUR religious views above someone else's. I will follow up. Please admit your position is self-contradictory.
volgadon Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 9 minutes ago, Gray said: The problem here is that we have no confirmed literary artifacts from the Nephites. If it were confirmed that would be an entirely different debate.
Gray Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 1 minute ago, volgadon said: If it were confirmed that would be an entirely different debate. Indeed!
Recommended Posts