Reader comments
MormonTimes.com: Raiders of the lost Book of Mormon DNA

What a fun article. I too however do NOT base my love for the Book of Mormon on science. It takes reading, pondering and praying to come up with the only answer that really counts.

I cannot wait for next weeks installment. I find archaeology just so interesting...

I know this man means well, but isn't he placing the cart before the horse? He's trying to find the Book of Mormon location based on an ambiguous science.

A geographical model for the Book of Mormon must agree with the internal requirements in the Book of Mormon.

Since central America fits the internal requirements for the Book of Mormon (among many others), and North America doesn't, it is more reasonable to assume that the genetic markers were either lost (because the group was so small) or because it has not been identified, or that Lehi's, Sariah, or Ishmael's family contained Asiatic DNA markers.

There are many other possibilities why there is European DNA markers in North America: additional migrations that we do not know about.

The possibilities have not been exhausted. Meldrum seems to be playing up to Mormon folklore rather than adhering to good scientific and archaeological principles.

The DNA criticism should easily be rejected since archeology in the Old and New worlds provide evidence for the Book of Mormon text.

The article states:

�Common conceptions among members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, including artists from Arnold Friberg to Walter Rane, imagine the events of the Book of Mormon in a lush tropical environment.�

This is consistent with the text of the Book of Mormon placing �new years day� during the warm climate period. We don�t just �imagine� that the Book of Mormon takes place in a lush tropical environment, the text makes it an internal requirement.

A "hot" new years day indicates "tropical." There is NO way that the great lakes area can fit that description.

Missing the Mark:
You are making an assumption that the ancient Nephite civilization had a New Year's Day on the same day as ours; January 1st (a relatively modern creation by the way). Most ancient cultures celebrated solstice days as the annual calender clock; which are June 21st and December 21st. June 21st in North America can be sweltering. Of course Dec 21st is not. The point being an ancient culture celebrated a new year when it felt like it. Not when we do.

From the article: "Even though he was not a geneticist, he was determined to find evidence.

"I went into this research with a huge bias," Meldrum said. "I already knew the answers. Because, you see, I know from a personal, spiritual standpoint that the Book of Mormon is a true document -- that it is a literal history."

So. A layman with a testimony begins a search for evidence to confirm his faith.

The chances of Meldrum's "research" being performed and reported with any semblance of intellectual honesty and scientific validity are precisely zero.

His readers won't care, however. They want bedtime stories, not science.

It is surprising to see how far some people will go in an attempt to make a silk purse out of a sows ear. What is it about these people that they can not accept or live reality.

Here, here, "byl046". I agree with you. I was about to write a very similar comment, but found yours already here instead. Very good point.

I think eventually DNA may be found in more than one location, here and in the Old World, that will point us in the right directions, gradually. I think little pieces here and there, not just DNA science, but other clues / leads will help the picture form over the years.

After all, the Lord does not usually just give us things on a platter. We must work things out first to show faith, then later a more sure knowledge can be obtained.

Who knows what other sciences He may show to us in the future as long as we keep digging and inquiring and working on it.

Good luck, really, I hope he finds what he is looking for. It does seem like many apologists have to "peddle hard" though. The BOM clearly states that the people were very numerous and had spread to the land "north and south". The numbers killed in the final battle are worth noting when trying to say they were a small group. It does not look like they were. Further the book indicates that God would not allow people to come here unless he brought them, it was a "land of promise" and "they were to serve him or be swept off from the face of the land". The massive findings of north-eastern Asian DNA validates what our eyes have been telling us...the people in the new world are descendants of Asians, mixed now with Spanish and some other Europeans. To date no DNA markers consistent with Isrealitish peoples have been found....Zero. But keep looking, I want the BOM to be true, but given the character of JS and BY and others, it don't look good. But it is a good book, and does have good teachings, alot of it straight out of the bible. I still hope.

Does anyone ever wonder if God was able to curse cain with a dark skin, that possibly he could make changes to DNA? Maybe this is why there isn't much DNA evidence: God wants people to develop a spiritual and not an intellectual witness to the Book of Mormon.

Confirmed science and truth are the same thing. God wants us to seek truth all that we can. That is why we must "digg" for the answers if we want to know the historical setting for the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon states:

Alma 32: 21
21 And now as I said concerning faith�faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.

Mormons should be about getting at the truth. We should not feel obligated to confirm every notion or opinion that LDS leaders or members have had about Book of Mormon geography.

If we follow the confirmed "science", we'll find the truth.

I think this is the same Dr. Jeff Meldrum who is the world's expert on BIGFOOT. Hmmm... Bigfoot and Nephites - they both have at least one thing in common.

How can anyone assess the DNA of Book of Mormon people? What was the DNA of Ismael and his family members? What about the DNA of the Mulekites? What about the DNA of Zoram? Were all of the Jaredites really killed off throughout the Americas? Could DNA from other sources have existed in Lehi and his wife through the marriages of ancestors? For example, what was the DNA of Joseph's children through their mother, Asenath, in Egypt? I think we know far too little about the people of the Book of Mormon and DNA to make any conclusions at this time.

A Good Indiana Jones story. I love all these wonderful fairy tales about DNA. We really do need to do some important digs and where some digs are well needed. We might start with the Southern Utah / Arizona border.

OK,
DNA does`nt work for the Nephites et al.
How about that the fact there is`nt one shred of physical evidence anywhere in the world for Mormon story.
The lost tribe thing was around in the 1700s (see Lewis and Clark).
Read the first volume of the Comprehensive History of the Church. Note the jibirish on the scrap of said plate copy.
Sorry folks....pure nonsense.

By1046:

You make a good point but the the great lakes area does not fit the geographical, cultural, political, internal requirements of the Book of Mormon.

Mesoamerica does. We can use reason and evidence that the "X" is not over upstate New York.

How convenient for a lay person intent on proving the truth he already "knows" to part ways with the theories of geneticists which go against that truth.

As a lay person and a non-Mormon, I'm not saying we know everything about the past regarding these matters. Of course not. And I'm not trying to incite a flame war here. I'm just offering an outside perspective, for it seems to me a sign of insecurity and doubt that someone who already knows the "truth" should set out to prove it.

We know where the next installment will go--there's no way he'll concur that the Great Lakes region has anything to do with the BOM. Such a conclusion would border on heresy would it not?

All good points...the makeup of DNA of a person in Israel in 600 BC may not be like the DNA of a present day Jewish inhabitant. However, from my reading of the "experts", they seem to think that current Jewish DNA and ancient remains of people in Palestine do match well....so this might mean that we should see something like that in the indiginous peoples in North, Central, and/or South America...but we do not, yet anyway. Some questions that we don't have answers to may be important...(1) what was Sariah's DNA (her ethnic background); (2) Would some of the wives (daughters of Ishmael) have been of a "mixed race", maybe Asian? So far, as I said earlier ("Good luck, really"), the evidence does not support the BOM's claims. BH Roberts "book" (atually published well after his death) is one that goes through a number of possible BOM origins other than the divine origin story. I suppose he could be right, maybe Smith did use Ethan Smith's "A View of the Hebrews" as source material for the BOM. Matters of faith, are, well, matters of faith. Science says the first people in the Americas came about 12,000 years ago.

To Bedtime and Others:

I was about to make the exact same comments:

From the article: "Even though he was not a geneticist, he was determined to find evidence.

"I went into this research with a huge bias," Meldrum said. "I already knew the answers. Because, you see, I know from a personal, spiritual standpoint that the Book of Mormon is a true document -- that it is a literal history."

I really don't understand how serious thinkers can expect "the truth" from researchers who already have their minds made up.

What's the point of doing any research if you already KNOW the answer?

I am very embarrassed about this article. I'm sure Dr. Meldrum means well, but he has spent a major portion of his career trying to prove the existence of bigfoot. He has been on various radio and t.v. programs giving proof that bigfoot is not an imaginary creature.

I think the Book of Mormon and DNA research deserve a little more serious study than from a bigfoot hunter.

Zwod:

You're living in the 1950s. There is lots of evidence for Book of Mormon that did not exist in 1830 but exists today. What you're saying is that there is not 100% conclusive proof that ALL of the Book of Mormon narrative is corroborated. LDS researchers will concede that point.

I have seen some comments that say its "PURE" fantasy and not "any shred of proof."

But we don't need 100% proof. What we need to find is evidence for some of the complex predictions in the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon makes many claims. It makes a prediction that in 600 BC there was a city between Jerusalem and the southern coast of Arabia called Nahom (NHM in Hebrew or Arabic).

The Book of Mormon states that due east from that ancient city, a garden spot in the middle of the desert will be found. At the garden spot, there will be over 14 distinguishable geographical features including specific fruit, ore, a harbor, mountains, trees, and honeybees.

In 2002, the British Museum cataloged, NHM (600 BC), and the garden spot was found on the coast of Oman.

All found.