Absence of evidence does not equal proof that something didnt happen.

[rpn]

In the last few years, there has been this find and the remains of a big battle in NJ.   How can anyone claim that the current absence of any BofM evidence is proof that it is fiction, when we know that we don't find things for a long time so we have all these notions, and then we do find something and learn lots more and often different things than the prior record of evidence supported?

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6280/1384.full

Quote

About 3200 years ago, two armies clashed at a river crossing near the Baltic Sea. The confrontation can't be found in any history books—the written word didn't become common in these parts for another 2000 years—but this was no skirmish between local clans.

...

When the fighting was through, hundreds lay dead, littering the swampy valley. Some bodies were stripped of their valuables and left bobbing in shallow ponds; others sank to the bottom, protected from plundering by a meter or two of water. Peat slowly settled over the bones. Within centuries, the entire battle was forgotten.

In 1996, an amateur archaeologist found a single upper arm bone sticking out of the steep riverbank—the first clue that the Tollense Valley, about 120 kilometers north of Berlin, concealed a gruesome secret. A flint arrowhead was firmly embedded in one end of the bone, prompting archaeologists to dig a small test excavation that yielded more bones, a bashed-in skull, and a 73-centimeter club resembling a baseball bat. The artifacts all were radiocarbon-dated to about 1250 B.C.E., suggesting they stemmed from a single episode during Europe's Bronze Age.

Now, after a series of excavations between 2009 and 2015, researchers have begun to understand the battle and its startling implications for Bronze Age society. ... unearthed wooden clubs, bronze spearheads, and flint and bronze arrowheads. They have also found bones in extraordinary numbers: the remains of at least five horses and more than 100 men. Bones from hundreds more may remain unexcavated, and thousands of others may have fought but survived.

 

[ksfisher]

5 minutes ago, rpn said:

In the last few years, there has been this find and the remains of a big battle in NJ.   How can anyone claim that the current absence of any BofM evidence is proof that it is fiction, when we know that we don't find things for a long time so we have all these notions, and then we do find something and learn lots more and often different things than the prior record of evidence supported?

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6280/1384.full

 

Where have you heard about a "big battle in NJ"?

[Calm]

Cool article, thanks for posting.

[Jeanne]

That was interesting...never heard of this before.

[strappinglad]

I think the OP meant NE as in Northern Europe , not New Jersey.

I found this statement illuminating.about the lack of firm evidence of large battles described in the literature of ancient civilizations like Greece or Egypt.

"There was reason for skepticism. Before Tollense, direct evidence of large-scale violence in the Bronze Age was scanty, especially in this region. Historical accounts from the Near East and Greece described epic battles, but few artifacts remained to corroborate these boastful accounts. “Even in Egypt, despite hearing many tales of war, we never find such substantial archaeological evidence of its participants and victims,” UCD's Molloy says. "

 

[rpn]

There was some find in the process of building a new mall, in NJ, if I recall correctly.

[consiglieri]

Nobody thinks that the absence of evidence "proves" something didn't happen.

It is just that it is the worst type of argument to say something happened even though we have no evidence for it.

Consider the universe of crazy and outlandish things for which we have no evidence that people could believe and yet make the same argument.

From Bigfoot to colonies on the moon, the world is your oyster.

 

[rodheadlee]

3 hours ago, consiglieri said:

Nobody thinks that the absence of evidence "proves" something didn't happen.

It is just that it is the worst type of argument to say something happened even though we have no evidence for it.

Consider the universe of crazy and outlandish things for which we have no evidence that people could believe and yet make the same argument.

From Bigfoot to colonies on the moon, the world is your oyster.

 

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/luna/esp_luna_35.htm

[Joshua Valentine]

If this is in reference to the final battle at Cumorah, then, usually if we know the location of a claimed event and there is none of the absolutely required evidence for that event at that location, then we have strong reason to believe the event did not happen.  Obviously, shell games are played with the location of the final battle between the Nephites and Lamanites.  But it's interesting that the location is doubted - not the evidence that should accompany it (100s of thousands of bodies, armor, etc, etc.) or the depths that the evidence should have been found at "the Hill Cumorah".  

[thesometimesaint]

49 minutes ago, Joshua Valentine said:

If this is in reference to the final battle at Cumorah, then, usually if we know the location of a claimed event and there is none of the absolutely required evidence for that event at that location, then we have strong reason to believe the event did not happen.  Obviously, shell games are played with the location of the final battle between the Nephites and Lamanites.  But it's interesting that the location is doubted - not the evidence that should accompany it (100s of thousands of bodies, armor, etc, etc.) or the depths that the evidence should have been found at "the Hill Cumorah".  

We don't know where that "final battle" took place. After only a relatively few years bodies turn to dust or are buried; armor rots and/or is carried away. A logical idea is that the Hill Cumorah is not the same one as described in the Book of Mormon. 

[PeterPear]

On March 25, 2016 at 3:54 PM, consiglieri said:

Nobody thinks that the absence of evidence "proves" something didn't happen.

It is just that it is the worst type of argument to say something happened even though we have no evidence for it.

Consider the universe of crazy and outlandish things for which we have no evidence that people could believe and yet make the same argument.

From Bigfoot to colonies on the moon, the world is your oyster.

 

Bigfoot believes in you

 

 

[Joshua Valentine]

3 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

We don't know where that "final battle" took place. After only a relatively few years bodies turn to dust or are buried; armor rots and/or is carried away. A logical idea is that the Hill Cumorah is not the same one as described in the Book of Mormon. 

Yes, the "other Hill Cumorah" shell game. It reminds me of the naturalist's game of a multiverse behind the beginning of our universe. Just push it back a step whatever the accompanying complications. I do not know the strengths of other Hill Cumorah hypotheses, but I'm sure they never existed until what was not found at the hill Cumorah was not found. And the consistency issues of where the plates were initially buried and where they were found and how Joseph and other LDS leaders understood the Hill Cumorah they knew about, I suspect are substantial.

Absence of evidence will never prove something didn't happen as long as there is another hill somewhere, coincidentally but only hypothetically with the same name. 

[The Nehor]

On 3/25/2016 at 5:54 PM, consiglieri said:

Nobody thinks that the absence of evidence "proves" something didn't happen.

It is just that it is the worst type of argument to say something happened even though we have no evidence for it.

Consider the universe of crazy and outlandish things for which we have no evidence that people could believe and yet make the same argument.

From Bigfoot to colonies on the moon, the world is your oyster.

 

Yes, so I guess we have to go with other standards in these cases.

If only there were a principle covering such cases.....hmmmmmmm

[thesometimesaint]

6 hours ago, Joshua Valentine said:

Yes, the "other Hill Cumorah" shell game. It reminds me of the naturalist's game of a multiverse behind the beginning of our universe. Just push it back a step whatever the accompanying complications. I do not know the strengths of other Hill Cumorah hypotheses, but I'm sure they never existed until what was not found at the hill Cumorah was not found. And the consistency issues of where the plates were initially buried and where they were found and how Joseph and other LDS leaders understood the Hill Cumorah they knew about, I suspect are substantial.

Absence of evidence will never prove something didn't happen as long as there is another hill somewhere, coincidentally but only hypothetically with the same name. 

 

Which is the "real" Bethlehem?

Bethlehem, Alabama Bethlehem, Conway County, Arkansas Bethlehem, Litchfield County, Connecticut Bethlehem, Holmes County, Florida Bethlehem, Georgia Bethlehem, Clark County, Indiana Bethlehem, Wayne County, Iowa Bethlehem, Henry County, Kentucky Bethlehem, Claiborne Parish, Louisiana (historical) Bethlehem, Winn Parish, Louisiana Bethlehem, Caroline County, Maryland Bethlehem, Marshall County, Mississippi Bethlehem, Missouri Bethlehem, Grafton County, New Hampshire

Bethlehem, Albany County, New York Bethlehem, North Carolina Bethlehem, Ohio Bethlehem, Pennsylvania Bethlehem, Meade County, South Dakota Bethlehem, Henry County, Tennessee Bethlehem, Texas Bethlehem, West Virginia Old Bethlehem, Warren County, North Carolina Little Bethlehem, Hamilton County, Ohio South Bethlehem, Pennsylvania New Bethlehem, Clarion County, Pennsylvania Saint Bethlehem, Montgomery County, Tennessee Upper Bethlehem, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands

[Tacenda]

11 hours ago, Joshua Valentine said:

If this is in reference to the final battle at Cumorah, then, usually if we know the location of a claimed event and there is none of the absolutely required evidence for that event at that location, then we have strong reason to believe the event did not happen.  Obviously, shell games are played with the location of the final battle between the Nephites and Lamanites.  But it's interesting that the location is doubted - not the evidence that should accompany it (100s of thousands of bodies, armor, etc, etc.) or the depths that the evidence should have been found at "the Hill Cumorah".  

I have to agree with you here.  I don't have the reference at hand, but I know that there have been prophets/leaders who state that the Hill Cumorah in Palmyra, NY was where the BoM lands were.  If so, it makes one wonder why there haven't been excavations etc to maybe find evidence.  But I've never heard/read of one taking place.  

[Sleeper Cell]

7 hours ago, Joshua Valentine said:

Yes, the "other Hill Cumorah" shell game. It reminds me of the naturalist's game of a multiverse behind the beginning of our universe. Just push it back a step whatever the accompanying complications. I do not know the strengths of other Hill Cumorah hypotheses, but I'm sure they never existed until what was not found at the hill Cumorah was not found. And the consistency issues of where the plates were initially buried and where they were found and how Joseph and other LDS leaders understood the Hill Cumorah they knew about, I suspect are substantial.

Absence of evidence will never prove something didn't happen as long as there is another hill somewhere, coincidentally but only hypothetically with the same name

If you “do not know the strengths of other Hill Cumorah hypotheses,” perhaps you shouldn’t summarily dismiss them (let alone ridicule them and accuse their proponents of dishonesty) until you do.  

[thesometimesaint]

7 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I have to agree with you here.  I don't have the reference at hand, but I know that there have been prophets/leaders who state that the Hill Cumorah in Palmyra, NY was where the BoM lands were.  If so, it makes one wonder why there haven't been excavations etc to maybe find evidence.  But I've never heard/read of one taking place.  

We allow even prophets/leaders to be wrong. It is a long and complicated history, but this article may give you a start.

SEE http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Cumorah

[Joshua Valentine]

40 minutes ago, Sleeper Cell said:

If you “do not know the strengths of other Hill Cumorah hypotheses,” perhaps you shouldn’t summarily dismiss them (let alone ridicule them and accuse their proponents of dishonesty) until you do.  

Had I "summarily dismissed them"?  I think not.  One does not dismiss something while offering that the possibility that they might have some good points to make.

Did I ridicule them?  This was not my intention.  If I was ridiculing anything it was the idea, not the persons.  I think you are referring to my use of the term "shell game". I did not mean this to be an insult to the people involved but as a description of what they are doing (I assume without conscious intention).  Just as people are not lying when they are speaking falsehood without knowing it, so, too, people can be doing the equivalent of a shell game without consciously trying to misdirect. Ditto for your accusation about dishonesty.

Let me point out that I never referred to the people advocating other Cumorahs at all, just the idea itself.  Perhaps you should direct some of your critical eye to yourself before being critical of others.

39 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

We allow even prophets/leaders to be wrong. It is a long and complicated history, but this article may give you a start.

SEE http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Cumorah

Thanks, thesometimesaint, I will look at this, too.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Joshua Valentine

[thesometimesaint]

You're welcome. You also might like "An Ancient American Setting For The Book of Mormon" by Sorenson.

[Duncan]

12 hours ago, PeterPear said:

Bigfoot believes in you

 

 

sasquatch ontario??? HAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA! you'd think a big hairy man thing would live in the less civilized parts of Canada like Alberta