clarkgoble Posted July 13, 2017 Author Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, hagoth7 said: There are samples dating before 200 AD on display. (And what's on display is obviously just a subset of what's in storage, and obviously a smaller subset of what's still under the earth.) Were they arrow heads or was that used as a generic term. There are small spear heads that date the period. I'm going by the standard article on the subject that most other articles refer to after doing a JSTOR search. http://anthropology.ua.edu/reprints/22.pdf Soi either they're mislabel, there's been a huge discovery not mentioned in the literature, or else there's some confusion going on. Quote Have to? Don't we need to grant others the freedom to determine which parts *they* happen to deem relevant? People are of course free to believe anything. I am assuming reasoned belief. But it's certainly no skin off my back if someone believes say a hemisphere model. I don't think they can support such a view. Quote I respectfully disagree. And I think the assertion that no rational person would disagree with my or your dazzling brilliance does a disservice to honest, intelligent people who *will* interpret data differently. Even Joseph said that he didn't blame others for not believing him. I think there's an important/awesome/empowering/liberating lesson there. Well I don't have time to get dragged into a Great Lakes model war. So let's ignore how all passages pan out and just stick with weapons described in the Book of Mormon. How do you explain the lack of relevant artifacts in the Great Lakes region during the relevant time period? To help you out here's a reference to a rather detailed study. It has lots of article references (many of which I looked up when posting in this thread) http://bit.ly/2sUX5vP "The Adoption of the Bow and Arrow in Eastern North America" Edited July 13, 2017 by clarkgoble 1
hagoth7 Posted July 13, 2017 Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, clarkgoble said: Were they arrow heads or was that used as a generic term. There are small spear heads that date the period. I'm going by the standard article on the subject that most other articles refer to after doing a JSTOR search. ...So either they're mislabeled, there's been a huge discovery not mentioned in the literature, or else there's some confusion going on. The relevant pics I took yesterday unfotunately came out too fuzzy to read the labels, but the period spanned before (and *long* before) 200 AD. As to what the overall samples consist of, they have many samples on display of ancient bows, arrow shafts, and arrowheads. Some of the earliests samples (far back into Jaredite timeframes) were simply tiny arrowheads. Smaller than a quarter. So if someone was gonna insist those little things were carefully fashioned simply to flick at their enemies at close range minus any shaft, I'd patiently/figuratively pat them on the back for now, and temporarily move on to other matters. I'd suggest, for any interested, to give the First Peoples display there a careful look-see. 1 hour ago, clarkgoble said: People are of course free to believe anything. I am assuming reasoned belief. *Everyone* believes their belief is reasoned. (Or they wouldn't hold it.) And to a degree sufficient for them, at that juncture, it therefore *is* reasoned. 1 hour ago, clarkgoble said: I don't think they can support such a view. Are you suggesting your facts and/or reasoning are better than theirs? Could be. Or are you saying more specifically that you feel you can dismantle their arguments? Could be, to your own satisfaction, perhaps not to theirs. Or are you saying that you don't believe they can convince you that you're wrong? Fewer and fewer people have interest in snatching from others what they *today* prefer to believe. Especially in nonessentials. Bedrock AoF "We claim the privilege...according to the dictates of *our own* conscience...and allow *all* men the same privilege...*Let them*...how, where, or what they may.... We're perhaps saying the same thing with different words. A buffet/marketplace of ideas is a healthy/empowering/liberating/charitable approach. Where if the dish I happen to prepare, or you happen to prepare doesn't suit someone's tastes,, diet, or needs *that* day, so be it. Mebbe another day. Mebbe someone else. Mebbe I simply need to rriff a bit on the recipe. Or patiently wait until people are a wee bit more hungry. "In the essentials, unity. In the nonessentials, liberty. In *all things*, charity. 1 hour ago, clarkgoble said: ...if someone believes say a hemisphere model. I don't think they can support such a view. I respectfully disagree. :::pounding a wee bit on a support pillar or two::: Seems reasonably steady to me. 1 hour ago, clarkgoble said: Well I don't have time to get dragged into a Great Lakes model war. Hadn't planned on donning war paint. Did I miss some important battle cry that I for some reason need march/defend/die on *that* hill today? The only thing I see the need to fight for is their right to believe/share that facet of their faith, according to the dictates of *their* own conscience..and my right to hear them out. Ditto with your facet and your conscience, but there are enough vocal advocates in that camp that no such defense is typically needed here. 1 hour ago, clarkgoble said: So let's ignore how all passages pan out [??] and just stick with weapons described in the Book of Mormon. How do you explain the lack of relevant artifacts in the Great Lakes region during the relevant time period? How do I? Dunno. You might be better served asking them. But to riff a wee bit, since you asked, I already saw enough relevant artifacts from ancient Utah yesterday, to demonstrate to my satisfacdtion that such things existed in North America at the time in question. From there, it's sufficient for my needs to simply pivot from there and extrapolate that such likely existed elsewhere in the Americas in wetter climes (fx. NE America and/or MesoAmerica), where bows and shafts would be *much* less likely to survive the passage of time. I think that's a balanced, reasonable conclusion. (Your results may vary. Contents may settle during shipping. Never begin an exercise regimen without first consulting a doctor...unless you choose instead to eat an apple a day. etc., etc.) If you opt to believe the Utah reality is instead a white-elephant aberration, so be it. Added: In that context, what's your take of the basketfulls of arrowheads earlier generations were said to have gathered from the NY Cumorah vicinity? I ask, because with the new-to-me bow & arrow data from Utah, mass discoveries of arrowheads elsewhere now carry quite a bit more significance *for me* than they had in times past. You? Edited July 13, 2017 by hagoth7
hagoth7 Posted July 13, 2017 Posted July 13, 2017 (edited) 38 minutes ago, hagoth7 said: Hadn't planned on donning war paint. Did I miss some important battle cry that I for some reason need march/defend/die on *that* hill today? ...But to riff a wee bit, since you asked, I already saw enough relevant artifacts from ancient Utah yesterday, to demonstrate to my satisfacdtion that such things existed in North America at the time in question. From there, it's sufficient for my needs to simply pivot from there and extrapolate that such likely existed elsewhere in the Americas in wetter climes (fx. NE America and/or MesoAmerica), where bows and shafts would be *much* less likely to survive the passage of time. I think that's a balanced, reasonable conclusion. ...[with] the new-to-me bow & arrow data from Utah, mass discoveries of arrowheads elsewhere [fx. NY Cumorah] now carry quite a bit more significance *for me* than they had in times past. You? Hmm. It would appear that I advanced on that hill anyway. Now look at what you (or whoever whispered that battle cry) made me do. Ended up donning water-pistol-war paint after all. Edited July 13, 2017 by hagoth7
clarkgoble Posted July 13, 2017 Author Posted July 13, 2017 2 hours ago, hagoth7 said: The relevant pics I took yesterday unfotunately came out too fuzzy to read the labels, but the period spanned before (and *long* before) 200 AD. As to what the overall samples consist of, they have many samples on display of ancient bows, arrow shafts, and arrowheads. Some of the earliests samples (far back into Jaredite timeframes) were simply tiny arrowheads. Smaller than a quarter. So if someone was gonna insist those little things were carefully fashioned simply to flick at their enemies at close range minus any shaft, I'd patiently/figuratively pat them on the back for now, and temporarily move on to other matters.I'd suggest, for any interested, to give the First Peoples display there a careful look-see. I've been there several times but simply don't recall bows from the relevant time frame. The two articles I linked to do discuss what the significance of the shape and size. For purposes of discussion vague memories of a museum isn't too helpful. Again JSTOR is free so finding peer reviewed articles isn't hard if you are interested in discussing the issue. Quote *Everyone* believes their belief is reasoned. (Or they wouldn't hold it.) And to a degree sufficient for them, at that juncture, it therefore *is* reasoned. Are you suggesting your facts and/or reasoning are better than theirs? Could be. Or are you saying more specifically that you feel you can dismantle their arguments? Could be, to your own satisfaction, perhaps not to theirs. Or are you saying that you don't believe they can convince you that you're wrong? I think you miss my point. We're here to discuss. To discuss is to give argued reasons. What people do or don't believe I can't speak to. I'm only addressing the issue of discussion here and in similar venues. I can but say the arguments I've read for the Great Lakes region were pretty underwhelming to me. (Which is not to deny in the least major problems with mesoAmerican models as well - but there are far fewer in my opinion) Again I'm always happy to be shown to be wrong since that almost always means I've learned something. Quote The only thing I see the need to fight for is their right to believe/share that facet of their faith, according to the dictates of *their* own conscience That was never in question. Quote Added: In that context, what's your take of the basketfulls of arrowheads earlier generations were said to have gathered from the NY Cumorah vicinity? I ask, because with the new-to-me bow & arrow data from Utah, mass discoveries of arrowheads elsewhere now carry quite a bit more significance *for me* than they had in times past. You? According to all the articles I could find they aren't in the relevant period. Arrows from 100 AD or later really aren't relevant.
hagoth7 Posted July 14, 2017 Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, clarkgoble said: For purposes of discussion vague memories of a museum isn't too helpful. Clark, In my book, an offered recommendation precisely where to go to see *and confirm for yourself* the specifics of something witnessed less than 12 hours prior, that precisely match what you claimed to be seeking, *is* helpful direcdtion. Whether you appreciate/apply that or not is *entirely* up to you. What more than that had you hoped for? 3 hours ago, clarkgoble said: I...the arguments I've read for the Great Lakes region were pretty underwhelming to me. Understood. I have felt similarly about the main three LGT assertions over the last several decades. No single LGT resonated for me. (Mebbe it was because the HGT in me was crying to come out.) 3 hours ago, clarkgoble said: ...Arrows from 100 AD or later really aren't relevant. While arrowheads from earlier periods are....quite relevant. To me at least. Are you positing that scores of too-small-to-be-spearpointl arrowheads, which happen to date to the genearl era you're seeking, were *not* for arrows and bows, and were merely for some other purpose, like dogtags carefully fashioned for a herd of baby curelom? Toss me an elephant bone here clark. I'm no longer sure what you really want, or if you even do. Edited July 14, 2017 by hagoth7
clarkgoble Posted July 14, 2017 Author Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, hagoth7 said: In my book, an offered recommendation precisely where to go to see *and confirm for yourself* the specifics of something witnessed less than 12 hours prior, that precisely match what you claimed to be seeking, *is* helpful direcdtion. Whether you appreciate/apply that or not is *entirely* up to you. What more than that had you hoped for? I confess I must be missing something. I went back through the prior pages and didn't see any reference to a book. Was it in a different thread because I confess I don't read most of the threads here. Most days I just look at replies to comments. If it's online I'll check it out. I saw a reference to a museum, but I don't consider that a valid source for a variety of reasons. Quote While arrowheads from earlier periods are....quite relevant. To me at least. Are you positing that scores of too-small-to-be-spearpointl arrowheads, which happen to date to the genearl era you're seeking, were *not* for arrows and bows, and were merely for some other purpose, like dogtags carefully fashioned for a herd of baby curelom? That's not my positing but the argument of most scholars. There are ways to distinguish atlatl heads, dart heads, and bow heads. I should note there are some arrow heads around 3000 - 2000 BC but then they disappear. So I'm just looking at what the arguments in the peer reviewed journals are. Myself I'm not really competent to make such judgments. Edited July 14, 2017 by clarkgoble 1
hagoth7 Posted July 14, 2017 Posted July 14, 2017 27 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: I confess I must be missing something. I went back through the prior pages and didn't see any reference to a book. ... Ah. Simple misunderstanding. I'll own that. The phrase "in my book" was intended merely as figure of speech. Guess I need to be more clear when I'm being figurative. <---- wanting a font or emoticon that clearly indicates "warning, figurative speech ahead"
Recommended Posts