Amazing example of pot calling kettle black by flipping logic and science to make TSCC's crap look good; enjoy a chuckle and inward rage all in one read!

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Book_of_Mormon/DNA_evidence/Responding_to_critical_claims#Gospel_Topics:_.22Basic_principles_of_population_genetics_suggest_the_need_for_a_more_careful_approach_to_the_data.22

P.S. They use the word "nuanced"--one of my favorite "We got nuthin'" bullshit detectors!

But wait... there's more bullshit waiting to be read.

"Question: Was Joseph Smith ever charged with adultery under Illinois law?

"William and Wilson Law charged Joseph with adultery in the case of Maria Lawrence.

"Joseph Smith was, in fact, once charged with adultery under Illinois Law. This occurred shortly before his death, when Robert Foster, William Law (Joseph's former counselor in the First Presidency) and Law's brother Wilson charged Joseph with adultery in the case of Maria Lawrence.[9]:403,414 Joseph took an aggressive stance in the defense of himself and Maria, which would be surprising if Illinois law was as detrimental to his case as many have assumed.

"For example, as soon as Joseph was charged, two days later he and his supporters "rode to Carthage, intent on having" the charge "'investigated.'"[9]:404

"Illinois law only criminalized adultery or fornication if it was "open".

"It is vital to understand, however, that:

"Joseph Smith could not have been properly convicted of adultery under the law of Illinois in 1844. Illinois law only criminalized adultery or fornication if it was "open". Had Joseph lived to face trial on this charge, he would have had good reason to expect acquittal because his relationships with his plural wives were not open, but were kept confidential and known by a relative few. Given a fair trial on this indictment, Joseph could have relied on several legal defenses.[9]:402

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Hiding_the_practice

I wonder if BYU law school teaches the “it’s only illegal if you get caught” defense.

Frantic Attempt to Ignore Reality...

Fished these out of the old bullchip catcher...

>>The conclusions of genetics, like those of any science, are tentative, and much work remains to be done to fully understand the origins of the native populations of the Americas.

Nonsense. The only work that needs to be done is fine-tuning the "timetable" for the migration(s) and examining possible routes. We know Native Americans are all descended from a small population that crossed the Beringia land bridge 15-20,000 years ago.

We can find evidence for them (as a recent paper on ancient inhabitants of that area proved), but we can't find any mythical Hebrew--or Semitic--DNA.

>>DNA samples taken from modern Native Americans do not match the DNA of modern inhabitants of the Middle East.

Neither do those taken from pre-Columbian remains. The Anzick Clovis Child (shown to be related to all Native Americans) and Kennewick man put the "fictional crapola" stamp on the BOM.

FAIR's M.O.--When in doubt deny or obfuscate...

>>Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples, and even if their genetic profile were known, there are sound scientific reasons that it might remain undetected. For these same reasons, arguments that some defenders of the Book of Mormon make based on DNA studies are also speculative.

Nothing is known because the BOM is the only "evidence" they existed. Scientists can't find them (see Ferguson, Thomas).

Well, to their credit, they do identify the three principal critics (all PhD's) who've publicized the DNA findings: Thomas Murphy, Simon Southerton, and John Dehlin...

Two of those have been excommunicated, BTW, and Murphy was threatened with a church court as well in the early days of RFM.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2018 10:17AM by SL Cabbie.

I heard an excellent summation of human migration out of Africa last month on KPFK in LA (That's Pacifica Radio, a commie outfit that TBM's would *never* listen to :-) )

Anyway, it turns out that Kennewick Man actually did look somewhat "Caucasian" because that wave of migration came from people that lived in western-central Asia and not only went to the Americas, they went other directions, too, and in facial reconstruction he looks a lot like Patrick Stewart (although Captain Picard's DNA shows that he's not Native American.

I may not have gotten that quite right, but humans go waaaay back beyond 6,000 years.... :-)

What a dream come true for TBMers who just want to believe!

And, as a bonus---they once again claim bragging rights
for being the most persecuted. The phrase, " . . . figurative suicide bombing attack against the church," just left me howling. Oh, the drama! "The devil is working hardest on us because we are the TRUE church!" Creative writing at it's finest!

Almost every line in that article is as hysterically funny as it is desperate.

No doubt the author's arm is in a cast right now from patting himself on the back too hard.

"Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples, and even if their genetic profile were known,"there are sound scientific reasons that it might remain undetected."

scientific reasons = meaning the Book of Mormon peoples are fiction. You have a better chance of finding Gandalf of the Lord of the Rings.

"Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples . . ."

Since Lehi is supposed to have come from Jerusalem around 600BC, and Jerusalem has a verifiable history of some sort, how can they say "nothing is known" about Lehi and his family DNA-wise if they lived there at that time?

So yeah, they are fiction to us, but for a Mormon to say nothing is known is discounting their claim in the first place that Lehi's clan was one of the leading families of Jerusalem, which, unlike Zarahemala, did exist.

Anyway that is what occurred to me, as a non-historian, when I read that part.

The whole thing is just Grasping At Straws 101, which should be officially added to the curriculum at the Y.

"Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples ..."


So.....Ugo Perego has wasted a lot of time writing a book titled: 'The Book of Mormon and the Origin of Native Americans'?


Huh. He has a quote: "I love truth and I love life."

That should make him an ex-mo now, or soon to be....

The title is such a weak statement! "Basic principles of population genetics suggest the need for a more careful approach to the data."

Suggesting a need means nothing. I can't imagine a way to make that statement weaker.

"Basic principles of population genetics suggest the need for a more careful approach to the data."


How about: "Basic principles of common sense suggest the need for a more careful approach to the Mormon church."

I like that better.

"flipping logic and science"

The apologists had a major influence on my leaving the church.