Genes from 6 'founding mothers' seen in 95% of Americas' Indians
20K y BP is rubbish. The primary American Indian Y-hg, Q, is 15K-20K years old.
Furthermore NAs all belong to a subclude of Q called Q1a3a that is even younger;
probably less than 10K years old.
WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHERE THE NATIVE AMERICANS CAME FROM? THEY WERE HERE IN THE
AMERICAS LONG AGO. i THINK SOME ONE IS TRYING TO PROVE TO THE MORMONS THAT THE
NATIVE AMERICANS WERE NOT FROM THE LAMANITES. THE NATIVE AMERICANS ARE NOT FROM
ANY ORIGINS EXCEPT THROUGH THE LINEAGE OF LEHI. THEIR COUSINS RESIDE IN THE
There ARE such things and WERE such things as Lamanites. One of the many
'proofs' of any lack of intelligence in this country is the total reliance on
faulty genetics and inability to 'recognize' Hebraic elements (cultural,
anthropological, and linguistic) spread throughout (even if it isn't a majority
in every region) the Americas. That's quite pathetic -and in sheer contrast to
the more 'enlightened' Americans of 100-200 years ago.
I am an American native. There were never any such people as Laminites. How
absurd! You won't ever find any DNA on Laminites because they never
existed...whatever the tar ??????
Strange, some scientists here locally trace a certain spring area to
civilizations dating back over 40,000 years. Wonder who their mother was?
I wonder what they will be saying about me when they dig me bones up a thousand
years from now..."he held a McDonalds container proving he loved the cow over
I am not sure what you are saying, but it sounds like you support the theme of
accepting your hearts desire in spite of the contrary facts of evidence. In real
life this can be a great hinderance to one's association with reality and in a
study of history it is total bogus reasoning. In a social context it is a
difficult and costly problem to a healthy and successful community.
While data from modern sciences can be interpreted in ways consistent with the
BOM claims of Israelitish ancestry and Egyptian culture, some data can also be
interpreted in ways that are challenging to BOM claims, such as this DNA study.
While trying to be respectful of the strength of scientific claims(if there is
any), and not precluding any possible reexamination of scripture to make sure it
is being properly understood, Mormons probably hope for a resolution of the
conflict.However, when an interpretation not in harmony with the findings
of modern science is not possible, the LDS do not need to allow modern
scientists a "privileged" position in which the scientists automatically
determine the outcome.It is not justifiable to hold the clear teachings
of scripture hostage to current scientific interpretations of data.To
Anonymous and Willard:Your history is incorrect
To another blind follower, you are probably right and Newton is probably wrong
since he didn't sample the fall of all the apples on the tree and made a random
decision based on only one apple. It is a wonder any one accepts his research as
it must be biased. Yes!!
It's amazing how these great scientists can take random samples from a few
people and fill in all of the missing blanks, the history and familiy lines from
thousands of years of lost history! And how we accept everythins at face value
whenever it is presented to us "from the experts" whose whole career is often
based on theories and premises of those theories! Could it be possible that
these brilliant researchers would ever consider questions that might discredit
their life's work? Unbiased? NO!!
I'm certain there are bigoted people out there who will just simply come unglued
when they learn more and the truth about their own DNA. DNA can be very
disappointing to some people... very sad for them. However, DNA IS FACT!
Their theory that Native Americans and Siberians have been isolated since the
disappeance of this "land bridge" is entirely bogus, because it contradicts the
known historical record. For decades, scientists have tenaciously clung
to this "land-bridge" theory in part because it was their best refutation
against the Book of Mormon, and in part because they considered Native Americans
too inept, too ignorant and too "stone-age" to be able to build a boat.
Unfortunately for these scientists, the known facts paint a far different
picture. For centuries, Native Americans have been colonizing islands
throughout the Arctic, which are far more remote and inaccessible than Siberia
is. They have travelled hundreds of miles across the open sea hunting whales.
They have been travelling to Siberia to hunt, trade and marry into the local
tribes for far longer than white people have been in the area. They most
certainly have not been isolated from Siberia for 20,000 years. You don't need
a degree in genetics to figure that out. You and Anonymous have a serious
problem in that you view these scientists like religious leaders that cannot be
questioned or criticized. You sound like religious zealots desperately clinging
to your dogma.
Ben,Clearly, you do not understand genetics, and giving you a crash
course cannot be done in the space provided here.Suffice it to say
that your accusations that their "entire theory is bogus," simply because of
intermarrying and time estimates, reveals your level of ignorance on the
subject.Unless you show credentials otherwise, we can assume you are
an arm-chair hack trying to criticize professional scientists. We will take your
faulty logic in that light.Until then, we will put more confidence
in the opinions of those who know what they are talking about, if you don't
Real Science=Real Scientific Journal. There are other legit studies on this
matter in real journals. If you really want to know what is going on in this
story, research the scientists that are reporting the data. It should not take
long to discredit their data.
I can remember when a court of law condemned men to prison based on just their
blood type. We only know that we have a lot more to learn. Science is a
wonderful thing. It saves lives, it dates history, it teaches respect of the
Earth. Next year it will save more lives, give a better quality to those lives,
clarify previous studies done, and much much more. Religion cannot be
proven, it is a personal, tangible, realization to those who ask for it's truth
in prayer. Someday, those who do believe will be standing next to God, while he
explains to the rest of you what you should have been striving for while alive
on this Earth. Good Luck.
D2r2, If "peer review" was supposed to prevent them from getting
away with falsehoods, then why didn't any of their peers ever bring up the
obvious fact that Siberians and Native Americans have been inter-marrying for
centuries, and have not been seperated for 20,000 years, as these scientists
have so carefully calculated. A stubborn but true fact, which renders their
entire theory bogus. Most of these DNA scientists maintain a strong
belief in macro-evolution. They have a vested interest in refuting not only the
Book of Mormon, but also the Bible. The entire history of the theory of
evolution has been rife with fraud that continues even in public school
textbooks today. It is almost a conflict of interest for these like minded
scientists to police themselves with some sort of "peer review."
Basically, these scientists take a statistical sampling of DNA of the Native
American Population. Then they look for a limited number of male or female
genetic markers from very complex DNA patterns which link these populations to a
common ancestor. The selective data acquired can be manipulated to say
anything the scientists want it to say. Under such circumstances, there will
always be room for doubt.
It is not news to the scientific or religious community that there were many
migrations to the "New World" before europeans travelled here. We have
information about only a select few of these different groups. Modern Native
Americans are likely descendants of and carry genetic information from these
many peoples, including Asians.
Ben,You are wrong about statistics. None of these researchers could
get away with telling lies with statistics because peer review would prevent it.
The only abuses of statistics are those perpetrated by those in the popular
press or those, like youself, who live according to platitudes and clever
quotations rather than the evidence and the data.Science and
statistics have much more integrity than you are suggesting.
Anonymous, It does not matter whether LDS people have sponsored this
study or not. It is well known that there are multitudes of LDS who do not view
the Book of Mormon as a literal history of the Native Americans. DNA
scientists have also told us that every person on earth has a common ancestor.
Religious people have long known this ancestor to be Noah. These scientists
must walk a fine line between telling us that everyone in the world is related
and also tell us that Native Americans have no relation to Jews. Your
predicted response might be that that common ancestor lived tens of thousands of
years ago. Far longer than the Book of Mormon took place. Yet, according to
this article, these DNA scientists have also said that Native Americans and
Siberians had a common ancestry from 20,000 years ago, when these people are
known to have common ancestors from as little as one to two hundred years ago.
They thouroughly botched that estimate up, didn't they? So far, this DNA
"Science" is more like statistical analysis, and you can manipulate complex
statistics to say anything you want. There are lies, _____ lies, then there are
I liked the article and the DNA research, and the extremely brilliant men behind
this very interesting and fabulous work. This is quite beneficial to all
What does it matter man has never evidenced truth in his religion. Look back in
history and study man's relation with church or religion when has it ever been
related to reality it is a way of facing the unknown and nothing more so why do
you try to hold mormonism to a higher standard it is just the same old same old
dressed in a modern coat of wishful thinking. give it a rest.
To Ben | 11:04 a.m.,I am not sure where you are getting your
information, but the scientists mentioned in this article are sponsored by LDS
people, BYU, and the LDS Church. They have no such assumptions as those you are
accusing. They are actually trying to compete with the research by such
scientists as Simon Southerton to determine if DNA research CAN find ANY
evidence of Hebrew genes among Native American populations. So far, NOBODY has
found ANY evidence of Hebrew DNA among Native Americans. Unfortuantely, those
results are not consistent with a number of claims made by leaders of the LDS
Church, as well as scriptural passages in the Book of Mormon itself, not to
mention the teachings of almost every leader of the LDS Church from Joseph Smith
to Gordon B. Hinckley.No, DNA results cannot PROVE that there is NO
DNA from Lehi (or Sariah) among Native Americans unless every member of the
population could be sampled. But the probabilities are very high that there is
no such DNA, and NO study yet has found ANY.More importantly,
well-trained geneticists are much better equipped to do this research than you
are to criticize it.
Scientists are human too. They believe that ancestors of native Americans must
have reached the Americas via the land bridge from Asia. But the DNA doesn't
match so they invent their own Atlantis where the six women lived--20,000 years
ago, perhaps, so DNA had time to mutate or close enough to Asia to keep their
land bridge hypothesis intact.
To Naysayer,You have lost touch with reality. Good science HAS gone
beyond 18th century "enlightenment" science because that is what science does!
It is not "apostate", it is "progress" according to the aims of science.I hope you aren't a "flat-earth" conspiracist... but then if you are,
you will feel at home in Utah!
The world needs more smart people like Simon Southerton as well as Ugo A.
Perego. But more importantly, the world and Utah need more smart people who are
smart enough to recognize the value of the research of the smart Southerton's
and Perego's.Let's hope we find ourselves in the smart camp.
I know of Mormons who have made fun of the Bearing Straights theory and the idea
that Native Americans were of Siberian/Asian origin for HALF A CENTURY or
more!One of my students even wrote a long, well-researched paper on
the similarities between American Indian culture, myths, and history and those
of the Jews to demonstrate the connection. This student tried very hard to
persuade me of the idea, but ultimately failed.Of course, as a
history teacher, I have always had my doubts about the claims of the Mormons in
this regard. Now the DNA science comes through to confirm and vindicate my
arguments. Good to see this research getting the airtime it deserves in a Utah
These scientists have long maintained the false assumption that people in
Northern Asia and North America have been isolated since the loss of this "land
bridge". Nothing could be further from the truth. These scientists have
completely ignored the historical record over just the last few centuries, which
tells us Native Americans and Northern Asians have been freely travelling by
boat across the Bering Sea, to trade and intermarry for many centuries.
Of course, based on the historical record we should have fully expected people
in North America and Northern Asia to be related genetically, since they have
been intermarrying for all these centuries. These scientists have basically
told us nothing that we shouldn't have known all along. This contradicts
these scientists assumptions, and renders their conclusions bogus as well. How
can they be separated by 20,000 years if these people are known to have
intermarried with each other for the past several hundred years? Devoid
of false conclusions, these scientists have yet to produce any facts which prove
the Book of Mormon wrong. They only have their own cherished opinions, which is
all they ever had.
The world needs more smart people like Ugo A. perego. The world's future is in
science. We only have a limited time to find a way off this planet and on to
another world. I don't think it will be done by sending man into space but
rather sending man's seeds (genes) in hope of finding a furtile home on another
I agree with William, look at Santa Claus he has never hurt anyone and he makes
a lot of people happy and teaches us to give, celerbrate, family reunion, and to
love. We need guide posts and examples to follow in living life. Man has and
will always have his totems. It is a Christmas gift of God.
Excuse me Frank, one million more people went to alternative health care
practitioners last year in the USA alone. Obviously, people are leaving
your "medical treatment" in droves.I agree with Winston Churchill who said
the modern age of science was going to fly us on its wings right into stone
age.I also am offended at the "privileged" position scientists want in our
world, especially over spirituality. It is UNAMERICAN for people to be on
unequal grounds because of their beliefs, but that is exactly what modern
science has always aimed for.For all you science-friendly religions people
out there, know this:Today's modern science has NOTHING in common with the
Renaissance scientists such as Galileo, Copernicus, Paracelsus, or Isaac Newton.
Modern science is APOSTATE from them.
The Garden of Eden is a metaphor for the pre-existence. The term "a thousand
years" in the scriptures should be interpreted as "a really, really long time."
Many of the stories in the Old Testament attribute things to God that are
definitely not the work or words of God. In any event, I don't think that we do
well to take everything in the Bible literally (because much of it is literally
not true). I believe all of the above and consider myself a believing and
faithful member of the LDS church. The "limited geography" explanation for Lehi
and his progeny is the only credible possibility in light of our current
understanding of history and science.
If you want solid evidence about this study consider 3 things. The DNA testing
took place at BYU. The study was funded by Ira Fulton, a devout supporter of
BYU. And the LDS church recently changed the title page of the BoM to say that
"some" of todays Native Americans are descendants of the Lamanites. They know
that DNA evidence is proving their previous claims false.
Amazing how so many LDS folks think that because we have the Book of Mormon, we
have the answers to all of the anthropological questions that can be posed about
the peopling of the Americas. Or that so many feel they can reason out, by use
of the Bible and Book of Mormon, what happened to individuals and societies over
the centuries as the world populations changed. The Book of Mormon only purports
to evaluate a certain group of people over a certain period of time; modern LDS
scholars tell us there were millions more inhabitants of the Americas than those
upon whom the Book of Mormon focuses. We may feel we have the only "true"
church, but that by no means means we have all there is to know. Lighten up all
y'all, and stop showing your ignorance by tying to impress us with what you
think you know of science or what you think you can deduce on the basis of a
sketchy understanding of those two spiritually-based books.
A quote from Mark Twain seems particularly pertinent here: "There is
something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of
conjecture from such a trifling investment in fact." The scientists
have done a fairly good job on this publication. They use only mitochondrial
DNA. It seems a pity that many are trying to wrest a few of their "facts" to
disprove what the Book of Mormon did not say.Having looked at the
study itself, I find that it pretty much harmonizes with what that Book of
A plea to my LDS brothers and sisters: let's not get bent out of shape every
time a study comes out implying that the Nephites did not give rise to the
entire Native American population. A lot of this is based on Mcconkie writing
that the BoM people are the primary ancestors of Native Americans. First of
all, it's ridiculous to assume that there were one 2 migrations to the Americas.
Second, it wouldn't be the first time Bruce Mcconkie was wrong. It's perfectly
reasonable to believe that the Nephites' interpretation of their world (being
the lone inhabitants)was myopic due to their limitations in travel and
You are all forgetting "Big Bang, Big Bang."And here we are. Nice to meet
Rave on anti BoM peoples
Not to worry Mormons--there is plenty of evidence to show that there were
Hebrews in Ancient America. March 23, 1971, there was a picture of the Star of
David found in an Inca tomb (shown in the Deseret News that day); a Mexico City
professor of Anthropology claimed that this proves that Hebrews were in America
as early as 1000 B.C. Also check out Thor Heyerdahls studies culminating in the
Ra I and Ra II expeditions where he goes crazy trying to prove to
anthropologists that the American Indians came from the Middle East. Doug
"Science can be fooled by God". Why would God want to do that? Does God operate
by deception? Faith is a powerfull motivator, but it has one significant
weakness. It can be (and often is) misplaced. When this happens, where is
"truth". Supporters of the "Historicity" of the Book of Mormon seem to be
getting increasingly desperate in the face of challenges to it. This new DNA
"evidence" does not in any way disprove the Book of Mormon, but just as
importantly, neither does it lend any support for its historical claims.
I wonder if anyone read the part of the article that said: "The study also
confirms the presence of genetic subgroups of more rare, less known and
geographically limited genetic groups who arrived later." I am grateful to have
this science help confirm the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.
I find it interesting that only the validity of the LDS faith is being
questioned. If the DNA evidence shows that these common ancestors lived 20,000
years ago that disproves anyone who believes that Adam and Eve were on the earth
only a couple thousand years ago, whether they are Catholic, Muslims, Baptist,
or whatever. Faith is not about scientific proof, and this doesnt effect my
belief in Jesus Christ in any way.
What is all the fuss about, no one ever said the BOM people were a historical
account of physical nature, they are a religious people from devine revelation.
It is the elan of their existence that inspires truth just listen to their
message and learn.
to Reader: you kind of rode that horse a little hard, don't yah think? True,
it was accurate... but many are not ready for that kind of icey water on the
face. You have to use a little logical persuasion here and there, some balm
would be nice.As humans with a brain for analysis, we are faced with
the age old dilemma. Do we believe in what our authorities tell us (mom, dad,
school teachers, religious leaders, politicians, sociologists, etc.) or do we
follow that 2 plus 2 is 4? When confronted with something that rearranges our
thinking, or could, do we use our brains or do we fall back, get lazy in our
thinking, and just accept things so that we can keep our job, our position in
society, our authority as an adult?Frankly, it is good use the brain
that someone gave us. I think we could even say it is expected, accepted, that
we use this brain. Medicine? Engineering? Nutritional sciences? Agriculture?
Fish/wildlife? Vaccinations? If we can use the science and the scientific
method to be "Good samaritans" on earth, where is the wrong? It is ok to read
and believe in science.Shadow Knows.
If Indians have six founding mothers, then these 6 must not have any mothers in
common or else Indians would have fewer than 6. If this is the case, according
to evolution, how could two or more separate lines of humans have evolved?This doesn't make mathmatical sense.
King Harold---Every human is the child of a mother who's female line goes all
the way back along a female line. Your mother had a mother who had a mother who
had a mother & so on. Everyone on the planet is the product of a female line
that goes all the way back. It's not very unusual.
DNA says everything about everyone. Nothing anyone can say or do to dispute
DNA... It's a fact! Take it, leave it or ignore it, whatever anyone of you want
to believe or contain in your mind or noodle is all up to you. If you want to
brush off the truth about DNA-so be it. No one cares because there will still be
DNA no matter what!
I would like to offer a few random thoughts on this topic:1. The
scientists analyzed 200 samples from American Indians (yes, I know they are not
East Indians and Columbus was mistaken, but anyone born in America is a native
American; I, for one am not native to anywhere else, nor do I see myself as
hyphenated; nearly all the Indians I have known, Apache, Navajo, Pueblo, Seneca,
Mohawk, Hopi, etc., call themselves by tribe or nation first and "Indian"
second, except, of course, the youth who went to politically correct government
schools in the last 10 years or so)to determine the mitochondrial DNA of all
North, Central and South American Indians? The federal government recognizes
over 500 tribes in just the USA alone. Then there are all the tribes in Canada,
Central and South America. Doesn't 200 samples seem insignificant statistically?
200? Gallup would be laughed at with that paucity of data.
To Utah Republician, Wasn't Lehi a Jew? If so, the Native Americans can't be
his decendents as there are no Jewish DNA in them. Is there any proof of a man
called Lehi any way??
Let's put this as bluntly as possible, there is not a single non-Mormon scholar
with expertise in the relevant areas anywhere in the world, to my knowledge, who
believes any of the claims of the BOM. You can cherry pick
evidence, twist semantics, completely gut the historical understanding of the
BOM (which was it was a history of the American Indians and the American
Indians, and Samoans, and Chileans, and on and on, were all Lamanites), relegate
it to some tiny area in Central America, and cite to Mormon apologists
publishing in Mormon publications that are not peer reviewed from now until the
cows come home, and it will not change the fact that the ovewrhwelming weight of
scientific, contextual, archelogoical, genetic, anthropological, sociological,
military, and statistical evidence (as it relates to the completely absurd
population growth rates in the BOM, which exceed by a factor of 100 in some
cases the highest known historic growth rates) evidence does not support that
the BOM is an accurate record of any ancient people anywhere in the Americas,
It is only fitting that as science has matured over the past 250 years, to the
point of being capable of solid DNA analysis, that the question of the origins
of the American Indians should be explored using our best science.The idea that the American Indians had their origins in Israel dates back as
early as 1765 (Boudinot, 1816) or before, in America, England, and Denmark.At least two relatively extensive books on the subject were available in
New York and Vermont before 1828, and the provocative idea was extant in that
region and in Europe (producing multiple editions of some of these books).In these books and in the ideas they spawned are all the concepts,
prophecies, scriptural supports, and claims that can be found in Joseph Smith's
works and teachings. He added little (if anything) that was new.I'm
afraid that science is destined to debunk yet another myth. Hold on; it will be
a passionate battle between faith and science, as the comments here attest. But
I think science has the better track record.
I see even though the moderator warned posters to keep to the subject: DNA and
Native Americans, we have those who insist on making this another "bearing one's
testimony" thing.Why don't these people go to Mormontimes and slug it out
there?This is very boring.
To Ruth Thanks for your scientific proof. I also believe in God. I don't
think any of us just didn't happened. I also believe that DNA is quite helpful
in figuring out who comes from whomever and wherever. It's nice that you believe
in what you think to be true because I have too many questions?I
read the article on Ugo Perego last Dec/Nov? on Joseph Smiths DNA. They found
some descendants who were not Joseph Smiths, who had formally claimed they were.
I would certainly like them to do some DNA on Brigham Young and wives and
descendant. Perhaps they have already done so and I missed the article? They
need to do some DNA work on the entire Polygamy cults, and find out who belongs
I thought the BoM said the continent was unihabited? Also that The original
Lammanites (nephites, you know the ones from Isreal) populated the entire
continent? Or at least dominated the entire continent? Wasn't the great battle
fought in New York? I thought the Limited Geography Theorey was new and
somewhat contreversial. Many who say this DNA study is irrelevant are
Hey, I don't know much about mormons. Why is it that all of you immediately
push aside any DNA evidence that goes against your belief? Being religious
myself, I would research anything that contradicted some of my beliefs
(excluding evolutionary and atheist theories). So why do you always just say "I
believe what I believe and nothing, even if it's cold, hard fact, will change
and on the warpath. I accept the landbridge theory as plausible, especially
since DNA EVIDENCE has shown that indians came from Siberia.All you
Mormons -- I'm not "anti-mormon", but I do want to know how you can "back up"
your Jerusalem theory without any evidence other than Joseph Smith's book.
These scientists are obviously left leaning, probably socialists, and more than
likely Democrats who are trying to undermine the beliefs of the people of the
great state of Utah. All of the right thinking people of Utah know that the
earth is only 6000 years old and that the North American continent wasn't
populated until a few hundred years BC by the descendents of Lehi. No scientific
evidence, no matter how accurate or well respected, can change that fact.
Does this disprove the Book of Mormon? No.Proof and disproof are such
misunderstood concepts.But even if it DID disprove the Book of Mormon,
would people leave the Church in droves? No.Jehovah's Witnesses suffered a
drop in members when their predictions about Jesus' coming failed. Those who
remained were even more dedicated than ever.Matt.16:28 included a
prediction that failed. Early Christians fell away. Those that stayed were more
dedicated. Later scripture was altered to turn that "coming" into a figurative,
future one rather than an immediate, literal one. Thus the Kingdom of God on
earth became a figurative place in heaven. (1) religious leaders make bold
predictions, teach radical doctrine, and prophecy amazing things to entice
followers (2) when their predictions, prophecies, and doctrines fail,
believers rationalize their beliefs to overcome the cognitive dissonance they
are experiencing. Rationalization increases dedication.The same is
happening with DNA and the Book of Mormon.
Active LDS. There is not one shread of DNA evidence that Native Americans came
from the Middle East but from Asia. Some show me where I am wrong. It is as
if there is no Lamanite population that existed but here is no trace of them
any where based upon archealogy, lingustics,or DNA sampling. How puzzling.
Any thing you present that nulls my argument is based on circumstancial or
How can DNA be acurate: If you believe in the Bible, Would we not all be related
to Eve? I don't think Sience has all the answersto DNA or Carbon
What is that I hear from across the ocean? The voice of Simon Southerton: "I
told you so; I told you so"Science is what it is. Arguing against it
the way many of you are doing only makes you look foolish. And nobody wants to
have "missionary discussions" from a fool!If you want to preach the
gospel, you have to speak the language of the people, and that language is
How do we know that the DNA found today didn't come from another planet when the
world was created? Perhaps it could be from another kind human or some kind of
similar species. I think the people in the L D S church have their DNA on
people just a bit mixed up. They just aren't relly certain who's who?
Nope.I think I'll stick to the Natives themselves in proudly declaring:"We've ALWAYS been here."But thanks for your posts just the same.
I do not care what any research lab says. I know the Book of Mormon is the word
of God. The native Americans are related to Nephi, Moroni and all the others who
came here from the Middle East.I have prayed and fasted too many times
about this and other things. Labs can speculate all they want to. I trust the
I don't agree with your assessment, I believe that your initial assumptions are
incorrect. First, we already know that this continent was populated probably
from peoples who immigrated across the Bering Strait. I believe a skull found
close to the Mexico City airport in 2002 was carbon dated at 13,000 years. So
given the fact that this was not an uninhabited land mass, reason dictates that
after thousands of years of many generations, any Hebraic mtDNA, if there is
such a thing, would have been absorbed among those that were of a much large
Is this about DNA or Book of Mormon testimonies?
Yes, it is the old problem of, "Don't confuse me with the facts." Next, "Shoot
the messenger!" "Hack slash, slice, and dice!"When I believed that
root beer was the root of beer, I knew I would not like it. When I tasted it,
wow! It was not beer, it was... well root beer.The scientific
findings are facts. They do not attack anything or anyone. But they do cause
consternation in those who thought that root beer must be surely be a beer.It is hard to change. It is so hard to come to a conclusion that what
you thought was ok or true yesterday, is so patently false today. Many people
in this forum are having troubles. The report's findings challenge their view.
Since their view must be right, because it has been held for years, then the
report must be wrong. It is as simple as that.How did mankind ever
get rational enough to build an airplane, when we just know that metal can't
fly! Our parents, our society told us so!But darn!!! There they
are, flying around us, all the time.It is hard to change.The Shadow enjoyed reading these statements.
And finally we get to the DNA issue and the Lamanites. As reported throughout
this blog sometimes correctly and incorrectly, mtDNA is passed down from Mother
to child, both daughter and son. However, it is not passed down from son to
anyone else. So, yes indeed there are breaks. Imagine the statistical
possibility of a mtDNA string being passed from female to female to female, etc.
with no breaks occurring. Additionally, it is reasonable to assume that there
were potentially hundreds of thousands if not tens of thousands of folks already
living somewhere on the American continent. So when you mix 20, 30, 40 Nephites
who eventually intermarried, what is going to show up in their DNA 2,000 years
later? Again, this is mitochondrial DNA not nuclear. The statistical possibility
of say Nephis wifes DNA showing up is nearly impossible. It's our initial
assumptions that we need to analyze rather than take the position that everyone
else is wrong.
So, does this mean The Theory of Evolution is to be accepted over Creationism?
Science has been a bible to me. It has opened my eyes to all mankind. I believe
there is definitely a God, but not a man made God by all the many religions out
and about on our planet. Some guy just happens to get a notion to
start a new church and then it starts up all over again-- a new religion a new
church for everyone to join. This is good for those who are lost and don't know
which way is up or down. So these kinds of people need a crutch to hold them up
and through a very crazy mixed up world. This is fine for some, but not for me.
I will praise God from my own heart and admire all of his wonderful creations.
But I will not worship or bow down to man or his made up religions and concocted
notions for a good fiction story.
Please keep comments on this story on topic. Off-topic comments will not be
posted and previous off-topic posts have been deleted.
harry, you demonstrate the blinders people of faith put on when science
contradicts something they believe in. Ice is frozen water, a solid. It has
more volume then liquid water. Also liquid water runs to the lowest point. So
if the land bridge is a mere foot above sea level then the ice would melt, run
into the ocen and expose a land bridge. I know you know this. To me a litmus
test of religion is can it accomodate science? Middle Age Christianity could
not accomodate evolving knowledge of the world. But it was the men of that era
not the teachings. I'm not Mormon, but is it possible you true faith can accept
these ideas? Or are they so core to your faith that your faith cannot coincide
with modern science? Those who say God is fooling science are making themselves
look foolish. I can believe God's plan was evolution and be okay, can you? I
can believe Adam and Eve and the flood, garden of Eden etc were parables an be
fine. Can you?
Now this guy was lost and he discovered the Natives having a BBQ with all the
fixings. Same thing here!
You are correct, the tower of babel didnt happen. It was just a story that tried
to explain why there were so many languages. Other things that didnt happen are:
Noahs flood, Adam and Eve, Lots wife, and other bible stories. All probably have
some truth, but not how they are written (by men) in the bible. That said,
humans have sentients (sp). We think therefore we are. I live everyday doing to
others as I would have them do unto me, without the threat of punishment or
reward. If you prefer to believe in a church and it makes you feel good about
life then that is great and I wish you well. If the only thing from keeping you
from doing wrong by your fellow man is your ultimate punishment or reward, then
you will invariably do those things anyway.
Here we go again! Someone telling the Native Americans where they came from and
from whom. To top it off, this has to be coming from non Native researchers and
therefore, the validity becomes questionable. A Native American research that
has been skewed once again.The Native Americans have always been here and
have been for centuries. It doesn't take a PhD to research this finding.
What does it matter if the BOM is historical or not, it is inspirational and
provides a good philisophical guide of thought and how to live a better life.
What?Scientific evidence and a logical conclusion?What's next? -
Proof of Evolution?
*** "If "science can be fooled by God," then God sounds like kind of a jerk."
***I don't know that that alone makes God a jerk, but I've always
felt that the idea that God would condemn to eternal hellfire those hundreds of
millions (or billions) of otherwise decent people who for one reason or another
don't believe in a story the evidence and logic of which is severely lacking
would make him a jerk.If that's the kind of God that He is then I'd
prefer not to spend eternity with him, anyway.Not that I think that
is the case. For my sake.
The tower of Babel didn't happen either I guess, because supposedly all the
different lineages sprung from that event. I guess I shouldn't believe in
anything, when we die were worm food. When I have someone flirt with me, I
should act on it, screw the consequences. I am just an animal, right? Why have
ethics if that's all we are, just act out our animal urges. Nah, I would rather
believe in God, I have lived both ways and have more peace believing in
something then living with no principals. What is the worst thing that can
happen by living the gospel? I have the love and respect of my wife and I die
with hope and a clean conscience. I will take respect with love and a side order
of hope please.
fr1nk,thank you for this. it seems nobody knows how carbon dating
actually works.carbon dating is very accurate when used correctly.thank you!
fr1nk,Don't try and explain science to naysayers. They won't
believe it unless they get cancer and want medical treatment.
When the climate im- proved and the ice melted, people "found an open, free
corridor to go to America," he said.Wait a minute, I thought when
the ice melted the land bridge would be covered with water. What going on here?
My faith in the science that only gets more accurate is shaken.
You are greatly mistaken if you think that humans lived in the time when Pangaea
existed 250000000 years ago. Hominids in their most primitive form were not
around until 5000000 years ago.
Oh no!Now Thomas is quoting scripture to us!
Radio carbon dating is quite accurate for the time frames involved. It is not
complicated. All living things "breathe" air which has a certain percentage of
carbon 14. Carbon 14 is radioactive. When something dies it stops taking in
carbon 14, and the carbon 14 they took in decays at a well established rate. So
when you compare the ratio of C12 to C14 you can with great accuracy tell when
that thing died.
It's hard to be an NDN, everyone else trying to define you in one form or
another , then try being a parent and explain all the labels which really mean
nothing as it is what is inside that counts!
Hmmm... I enjoy studies, but if I've learned one thing from the media, it is to
check their sources. I'll have to get my hands on that study some time the
future to see what they really said. Several years ago I read articles on the
report for WMD from Iraq, then I read the dozens of pages those reports were
based on. Realize, please that those dozens of pages were a summary. I
immediately lost faith in those media reports. Then I read the hundreds of
pages that those dozens were a summary of. After that, I said to myself, good
grief, the summary doesn't do it justice. I wondered why they created the
summary, then I realized that it was because our elected representatives have
probably never ready anything longer than a couple of dozen pages and wouldn't
have known what to do with the full report. In conclusion, when I read an
article like this, I say to myself, "Cool there's a study I should check out, it
sounds interesting." The rest is just garbage.
"ONE MAJOR PROBLEM" -- The more reasonable interpretation of the passage in the
Bible that says the lands were divided in the time of Peleg is that it refers to
the land being parceled out and divided among different tribes -- basically a
real estate transaction, not a physical separation of the continents.If "science can be fooled by God," then God sounds like kind of a jerk.
Scientists couldn't even take my DNA in the present, and tell you where I have
lived or where I have been in just my life--by plane, land, or boat--let alone
if I had lived 20,000 years ago. But possibly six women from Asia did make it
to the America's by land long ago, and had many ancestors. DNA doesn't even say
those women were born in Asia. It says their parents were Asian, but they could
have been born in America, or the Netherlands for all we know. What really does
this prove or disprove?I still don't see how true science and true
religion can't co-exist as one truth. We know from both that the
Earth's land was once one large mass. Both show that people were found all over
the land, at all different times. We know from both that all people originally
descended from two parents. Both know the Earth has undergone great changes.
Both know that people have had varying levels of technology, but neither
documents when the first boat was used. Time discrepancy? Science tracks
current natural processes, not accounting for how the creation may have followed
a more sped up time frame.
"...sometimes God lets things happen to...confuse us."Not *my*
God."God is not a man, that he should lie...." (Numbers 23:19.)"...people [want to] justify ... their scientific beliefs."Heaven forbid!
Right on Global Warming....Right on! I like that..."Climate Improvement". Eat
that one up Al Gore.
The dating methods are flawed and everyone knows it.They just can't seem
to get it into their heads.
What does this study have anything to do with when those ancestors arrived in
the New World and how does it prove anything about the timing of the arrival???
And what about Noah's flood? There seems to be some serious dating errors in
science and/or possibly in interpreting religious records. But then again...
the earth is flat, global warming is a real threat, Pluto is a moon, and UFOs
don't exist. It's amazing how much we think we know through science and really
we are clueless. I'm all for research, but let's not get carried away into
thinking that current scientific theory is absolute fact/truth.
The BIBLE says that in the days of PELEG, the land masses were one, and divided.
There could not have been a LAND BRIDGE 20,000 years ago, since the land was
solid at that point. Consider this, IF the LORD moved a mountain
over night, would the geologist say the mountain was JUST put there, or would
the mountain seem to the geologist to have been there for millions of years.
Assuming the mountain ACTUALLY was moved by the LORD, the day before? Of
course, the mountain would look to have ALWAYS been in the current spot.Science cannot be trusted to tell us all things that we need to accept
on faith. Science can be fooled by God.
Y'all are nothing but monkeys. The DNA matches perfect!
"Why not ask one yourself" -- Oral history isn't worth the paper
it's written on. Ever play that game where you tell a person a
story, and then he passes it on to the next person, and so forth down a line of
ten people? The story you get at the end is usually completely
different from the original story.The Viking sagas originated as
oral traditions long before they were written down in the 1200s. If you take
them as gospel, you have to accept the existence of trolls, ghosts, witches, and
all kinds of bizarre things. Oral traditions may contain fragments
of the truth, but overall, they're hardly one step removed from the realm of
The 20,000 year timeline is based on the current rate of genetic mutation. If
some event in the past caused several mutations to occur in one generation the
time could be shortened by several thousand years. Conversly, however, if
mutations are happening more quickly now, (for example because of polution) then
the time could actually be much longer.
Did anyone catch the phrase in the article that "the climate improved". Now
days, they call that global warming. We should call it "Climate Improvement"
Once both are understood, religious truth and scientific truth are never in
conflict. So this study is to be welcomed.
Actually if you read the article carefully you will find that they have no more
proof these ppl were asians then they have that they weren't from the middle
east. They even state they cannot connect them with asia and they use the
excuse of the DNA being changed over time. If anything this just proves that
they have no idea and are just speculating. The landbridge is all theory they
have no proof, they just base it on their believe that no one ever built a boat
to cross the seas before Columbus.
I love the comments about how science always changes so you can't believe it.
Science becomes more accurate over time. Over a given 10 year period (or so)
there may be contradictions, but eventually science moves towards truth.
Unfortunately faith does not. Faith is rigid and persecutes those who say the
earth is round or the universe rotates around the earth. If your faith does not
allow for the expansion of knowledge then you need to ponder that. I can
believe in the God of Abraham and Jesus and still allow vast amounts of change
in my understanding of the natural world. If the BoM is proven, or at least
beyond a reasonable doubt, proven to be untrue where do you go?
If y'all are interested in the subject of DNA testing as it relates to ancestry,
go to National Geographic's website and read about their "Deep Ancestry"
project. It's very interesting and shows how the ancestry of modern humans is
complicated. In other words, those of us w/ European background might not
realize that our ancient ancestors migrated through Asia or India to get to
Europe.One of my sons was born with a trait known as "Mongolian blue
spots", an indication that we have ancestry from that part of the world. For
years I assumed this was an old wive's tale, but am now waiting for DNA results
to give me more information.As for the Lamanites, scientific studies
have shown that the American continent was already peopled when Lehi's family
arrived here (600 BC), and it should be assumed that this small band of people
intermixed with the older settlers. I have never heard it preached that all
Native Americans are descendants of that one family.
To always: 8:35 -I suggest you ask a Native American that
question.Their history has been passed down word-of-mouth for
generation after generation.They have ALWAYS been here.
To fr1nk: Archaeologists have found evidence supporting what you suggest. Stone
tools believed to have been used in boat-building were found at Eel Point on San
Clemente island off the coast of southern California. A quote from the article
Seafaring clue to first Americans, Paul Rincon, BBC News online, 2/26/04: People
in North America were voyaging by sea some 8,000 years ago, boosting a theory
that some of the continents first settlers arrived there by boat.
As one who has plotted taking my canoe with provisions from central Illinois
down the rivers to the Mississippi and then up the Missouri to Jackson County;
I'd say water transport to North America seems more practical. Why do you need
a land bridge at all? Why walk over the land bridge and then get into your boat
to travel along the coastal waters to South America? Assuming you left
Russia/Alaska land bridge and came south; why in the world would you pass the
northwestern states and hike all the way through the deserts of Mexico to get to
Chile quickly. It doesn't make sense to me. There's more to the story. Lots
more boat transport of peoples than we have evidence of so far.
20,000 years? Every time I see these dates I just wonder. They are such
irrelevant numbers. The margin of error is huge, the methods used to come up
with these numbers are just "hopes" that they are correct (they are less than
theories). Only a few science/biology teachers I've had actually were brave
enough to argue that these dating methods are actually quite like a guess in the
dark.....They are the current method, and very popular today, so nobody wants to
appear like they're off.... but if you read textbooks carefully..... it's there
- carbon dating, etc. sounds lame!
The warning flag should have gone up with the 95% number. C'mon, think for a
moment. That would mean the researchers would have needed samples from the
highest latitudes of Canada to the tip of South America. What happened to the
DNA of the Polynesian populations scientist are fairly confident reached the
americas. What of the DNA of the Vikings we know settled in North America? My
own research shows the founder of the whole native American population to be a
tall skinny guy with brown shoes and a well trimmed mustache.
200+ samples from a population that is over 1,878,285 in just the US. Add the
Canadian and central/south American populations and you show that the study
proves nothing and disproves nothing. As for the land bridge, proof from the DNA
being related to Asian DNA; What's to prove that Boats were not used? Just
because a Group of Asians came to America doesn't prove that other groups
didn't. This is bad research and a whole lot of guessing. When they
finally do get a good cross-section of the population then they should start
talking about the results and leave the theories out.
"Are they sure?" Very funny stuff. 20,000 years ago? I was always told
that all humans but eight were drowned about 5000 years ago.DNA
studies would be welcomed by a lot of people around here if they showed links to
the Hebrews. The fact that they show no link turns regular guys into DNA
experts. If the outcome of these studies were different, these 'experts'
would be using it as proof, in their favor.
I'm not sure I understand why people want to prove the BofM is wrong due to
genetic research. (It is quite possible I do not understand gene study.) If
you believe that we came from the same parents (Adam and Eve) , and even though
there are several races and peoples, shouldn't we all have the same genes? In
my mind God has the power to tweak, change or mutate genes, for his own wise
purposes. Otherwise, wouldn't the whole world be the same race, color etc? We
have more than one instance in the scriptures that people changed. I ask how
did this happen? God has that power.
just because they can be linked to the same small group of ancestors doesn't
mean they were in america the whole time
I have never liked the land bridge explanation. I picture a group that used
small boats to skirt the coastline, fish, and hunt marine mammals like sea
lions. If they "walked" over some land bridge, I dont think they would have
ended up in South America so quickly. If any anthropologist who would like to
chime in on this, I would like to hear it.
How on earth do they know that?
There were two very interesting statements in the report: first, "this is the
most comprehensive research ever into the genetic origins of Native
Americans."second, "The scientists studied all available complete mtDNA
data for Native Americans, amounting to more than 200 samples."Assuming the correctness of the two statements, I am led to my own conclusion
-- there are not enough data yet to be very sure of anything. How many opinions
do the political pollsters collect before they try to predict an election?
But the preliminary results are interesting. Stay tuned.
What will we do if a "Scientific Research" "shows that our Lord and Savior was
only a regular "joe" with good intentions?. I set my beliefs on faith and
testimony and not on "scientific researchs". after all science changes all the
time, and a testimony by the Spirit never.
The Native Americans I know tell me:"We've ALWAYS been here."
This is not the kind of research that the Sorensen people tout when they try to
get people to participate in their project. I'm glad that I have not given them
my DNA sample, and I'd be willing to bet they have very few samples given by
Native Americans. This sounds like research based upon a thesis that should
never have been a part of their project.
Someone with knowledge, please help readers reconcile post-Fall Bible time line
with science. Thanks so much in advance.
Ha Ha Ha! Funniest thing I've heard for a long time - Hilarious! Thanks for
Let's be specific: Can trace one specific line of their ancestry. Seriously.
Misleading headline. Misleading story. BTW -- and the other five percent?
This scientific study is only the newest piece in a very large puzzle. Next
year, if not next month, a newer finding will modify some of it.Even
a well-intended newspaper reporter cannot do justice to the subject. D.M.News,
you didn't add to your credibility, publishing this reporter's understanding of
the study.A lot of people, most of whom are Not Smarter Than A
Fifth-Grader about genetics, will try to draw huge unwarranted conclusions.And the study is not actually available -at this time- on the plos.org
website, for those who do understand enough to want to read the whole report.Stand by for a lot of interesting but irrelevant comments.
But the Lamanites are descended from Laman and Lemuel. How can this be? What
will we tell our Native American friends now?
Very interesting. This reflects the same thing I was taught in high school.
Maybe those anthropologists and archeologists had it right. Land bridge.
well... how about that.This information also reflects and old
saying: the more you know, the more you realize you don't know.
20,000 years ago. Does that upset anyone's paradigm?
I thought the Indians came over on ships from the Middle East. I remember seeing
paintings of this when I was a kid. These were huge people, and they looked
white, too. Even their children were built like weight lifters.
Be careful how you view this particular 'research.' Any scientific research can
show huge variations of data, statistics and figures from the exact same
information. Remember, there could be a possible hidden agenda here from this
research group, even though they MAY claim to be independent.