Rod'sdepth of spirit and knowledge are amazing. He has studied and learned from so many sources and he always puts the importance of the Spirit in all of his conversations.
Heartland for sure is the place, the land of liberty, the land choice above all other lands. The land of the New Jerusalem which is the same and of the Jaredites, Nephites and Lamanites.🙏🏽
I too had said the geology isn't so important to detect from the B o M because the book is true UNTIL I saw and looked through a copy of "Exploring the Book of Mormon in America's Heartland" that a sister who I used to visit teach has. I never understood the Meso theory but when I saw this book it was miraculous the confirmation I received. It was similar to what I felt when I joined the Church, obtaining a copy for myself to investigate this more. My testimony of the Heartland model is as strong as my testimony of the Gospel. Thank you Rod Meldrum for your efforts and research in bringing this to light.
WOW!!! The video on volcanoes and this video had my draw dropping. It just shows me that the truths that god is trying to reveal are always hidden in plain sight. I have grown up in the US my entire life and never once have I heard about this fault line or the disaster that happened there in the 1800s. This is incredible information. Thanks for sharing this.
Rod needs to actually update his research before he presents. Do a search on Examining "Geology and the Heartland Geography Model for the Book of Mormon" and "Mormonism with the Murph" and watch that video if you are interested in an objective scientific discussion. A volcano (and a regional earthquake) is needed to account for all of the elements identified in the Book of Mormon. Primarily the elements that are lacking in an "earthquake only" model such as the Heartland or Baja is the lack of an extensive mist of darkness that covers all of the land northward and land southward. Sand blows, sand boils, earthquake dust, and earthquake smog only occur approximate (adjacent or close to the fault). Also, the BOM requires that individuals be killed by the "the vapor of smoke and of darkness". The gases coming out of earthquake fissures are in low concentrations in the air and have not been documented as fatal. With respect to the New Madrid specifically and the heartland model, the BOM says the greatest damage was in the land northward, not the land southward. As is shown by the potential earthquake damage map that Rod shows in others of his videos, in order to collapse primitive structures, it must be over Level VII. If you look at the map that Rod has shown in other videos, you will see that Level VII is does not extend into the areas required by the Heartland model. Ringing bells and rattling tableware is a very low level of shaking. Also, one problem with the New Madrid earthquakes, partly because it is a deep fault, powerful earthquakes sufficient to cause any damage, occur for weeks and last periodically over months and even years. The BOM event is over in 3 days. Finally, the word volcano is not found in Biblical Hebrew or ancient Egyptian, so "great storm", which was used in the Bible, is an appropriate translation of the event. In the 1792 eruption of the San Martin volcano, which is the likely BOM volcano in the Mesoamerican models, it was described by the natives as a "great storm".
Jerry, I appreciate your attempt to address the information in this video. As someone who has been fixated with volcanoes from an early age, according to your Book on the geology of the Book of Mormon, I understand how you would tend to look at the 3rd Nephi destruction through the lens of volcanics. However, the word volcano was known in Joseph's day as Noah Websters 1828 dictionary attests. Had a volcano been involved, it's hard to imagine why the word volcano is never mentioned. Clearly the Lord and Joseph Smith could have used it to clarify the cause of the destruction, but, as pointed out in the video, there are no observations given in the text that definitively indicate anything exclusively volcanic. No ash, no lava, etc. On the other hand earthquakes are specifically mentioned multiple times. As mentioned in the video, every single observation made of the destruction, 28 in all, was, in fact, experienced during the 1811-1812 earthquake sequence. There is no need to invoke a never mentioned phenomenon (a volcano) to explain the observations if invoking the New Madrid earthquakes. Nowhere does the text explicitly state that the mists of darkness covered both the land northward and southward, only that they experienced 3 days of the darkness "upon the face of the land" which doesn't specify the geographical extent of the darkness, only that it was observed. Nowhere in the text does it state that people died as a result of breathing the mist, but rather it does state that people lived through it (3 Nephi 8:23). So your assumed 'requirement' is incorrect. Geographically, the lands northward or southward obviously depend on one's frame of reference. The lands of Nephi, Zarahemla and Bountiful were said to be north of the land of First Inheritance and thus northward. In the Heartland model these equate to Tennessee, Iowa/Illinois, and Ohio, all of which fall into the destruction maps of the 1811-1812 sequence. Our understanding is that the earthquake sequence on the New Madrid in 3 Nephi was considerably larger than the 1811 sequence, which would extend the range of damage. The text makes no mention of collapsing all their structures, so that is not a requirement. In fact the temple at Bountiful (Ohio) apparently sustained no to little damage as no rebuilding is mentioned or was required. Ringing bells and shaking tableware happened hundreds of miles from the epicenter in New York, Boston and South Carolina, not even close to the epicenter in Missouri. Destruction near the epicenter would have been massive, as attested by both the text and the historical accounts. The most massive earthquake shocks and destruction in 1811 fell within 3-4 days, just as described by the text. So that isn't a problem as you claimed. Your assumption that because the word volcano doesn't appear in Biblical Hebrew or Egyptian and thus means that it is equivalent to a great storm demonstrates your obsession to see everything through the lens of volcanics. As I have traveled through Biblical lands and Egypt I am not aware of any active volcanos. Although there is evidence of ancient volcanoes, none were active in Biblical times, which could more easily explain why they are not mentioned. It is said that to a hammer, everything is a nail. Likewise to a volcanologist, everything is seen through the lens of volcanism. You can't un-see the fact that no volcanism is mentioned - or required - by the Book of Mormon text of the destruction in 3rd Nephi. But I commend your valiant effort to insert it.
@@BookofMormonEvidence First of all, your assertion that the Introduction to my book indicates an obsession with volcanoes is absolutely false. It says no such thing. I had not interest in volcanoes until I attended university, and only then just as a part of the overall study of geology. The Introduction to the book says no more than that. What you have asserted about me in this regard to my profession an career here and elsewhere on the internet I consider slander and find it unbecoming as a member of the Church. As a result I have actually retained an attorney to review the disparaging things you have been asserting about my character in these various public forums. I just apply the science. Anyway, to respond to some of your false assertions about the Book of Mormon: 1. The vapor (3 Nephi 10:12-13) identifies at least some of the methods of how the wicked were killed, and it includes being "overpowered by the vapor of smoke and darkness." It did kill people. 12 And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints, who were spared-- 13 And they were spared and were not sunk and buried up in the earth; and they were not drowned in the depths of the sea; and they were not burned by fire, neither were they fallen upon and crushed to death; and they were not carried away in the whirlwind; neither were they overpowered by the vapor of smoke and of darkness. 2. Your assertion that the BOM text does not indicate the collapsing of structures is false. 3 Nephi 8:14 14 And many great and notable cities were sunk, and many were burned, and many were shaken till the buildings thereof had fallen to the earth, and the inhabitants thereof were slain, and the places were left desolate. 1 Nephi 12:4 4 And it came to pass that I saw a mist of darkness on the face of the land of promise; and I saw lightnings, and I heard thunderings, and earthquakes, and all manner of tumultuous noises; and I saw the earth and the rocks, that they rent; and I saw mountains tumbling into pieces; and I saw the plains of the earth, that they were broken up; and I saw many cities that they were sunk; and I saw many that they were burned with fire; and I saw many that did tumble to the earth, because of the quaking thereof. 3. Your discussion that there were no active volcanoes in the Egypt/Israel area makes my point exactly! They had no word for volcano, likely because they observed none. The fact that there is documentation that the natives in Mesoamerica described a volcanic eruption as a "great storm" is evidence of the Mesoamerican model, not the Heartland. 4. You assert that vapor of darkness did not cover all the land. This is false and contrary to the text of the Book of Mormon. As just cited, 1 Nephi 12:4 said that the darkness was on the face of the land of promise, and 3 Nephi 8:20 requires that it cover "all the face of the land" 3 Nephi 8:20 20 And it came to pass that there was thick darkness upon all the face of the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof who had not fallen could feel the vapor of darkness; 5. Although you have ignored it repeatedly, the BOM text requires the bulk of the destruction to occur in the land northward, not southward (3 Nephi 8:12-14). The cities of Jacob and Jacob-ugath are indicated to be at the far end of the land northward, and it had hills and valleys left of it and the people were buried in the depths of the earth and Jacob-ugath burned with fire (3 Nephi 9:8-9).
Come now, Jerry, and take a calm breath. A quick review of the first paragraph of your book is in order to understand where I got the idea of an obsession you have with volcanoes. To ensure that I am not taking something out of context, here's a photo of that paragraph from your book. I can't seem to add the image, but here are your opening words. "INTRODUCTION My first breath of life was taken on the extinct volcano Ko'olau. As a young missionary in Sicily I sat up late at night fascinated by the bright red incandescent lava streams, moving down the slopes of Mount Etna, hearing the booms of dynamite detonated by desperate Italian geologists and engineers who were trying to divert the lava coming off the volcano to keep it from destroying homes and buildings. As a young man, I spent months traipsing through the deserts of Nevada mapping and drilling ancient volcanic deposits with the hopes of detecting traces of gold deposited in or beneath the volcanic deposits and shockingly, I actually found some." Your interest in volcanoes seem to have been an impetus to your becoming a geologist. In your book you are very clear about your preferred Mesoamerica centric geographic location of the Book of Mormon, your belief exclusively in the 'Sorensen model' and your insistence on volcanics being an "essential element" of the events described in 3rd Nephi. Don't make me quote you from your own book to back up the above facts. My comment was not to disparage your obsession with volcanics but simply to point it out. There's nothing wrong with having a deep interest in it, only that it could affect your viewpoints as demonstrated. There is no need to waste your money on a frivolous lawsuit you couldn't possibly win as I haven't disparaged you in any way. I am simply pointing out that your primary assumptions may be incorrect. You have taken issue with me and my research publically, so you opened the door for a public response. I'm sorry if you cannot abide alternative viewpoints, but your threat doesn't scare me or keep me from responding. Actually, it demonstrates the common methodology of many Mesoamerica proponents. If they are questioned or rebutted, they resort to threats and lawsuits rather than engage in discussion. Thank you for your demonstration of bullying in public. Should you choose to pursue your defamation lawsuit against me, I'll be sure to bring up your public replies to the video and your threats of lawsuits. I am simply expressing my first amendment right to engage in a public discussion on the topic. If you don't want a public discussion than I suggest not engaging in public discussion in the first place. I have no animosity toward you and would enjoy a more personal discussion if you'd like. But I doubt you'd be interested in doing so. As a professional scientist I would hope that you would be interested in critiques of your research, a sort of peer review, as it were. I am only taking issue with your primary assumptions, not your personal character. I have been respectful and haven't called you names or questioned your motives, only your assumptions, which I believe may be challenged. We are both faithful members of the church we both love and students of the Book we are discussing. How about we act as such and drop the threats of lawsuits?
@@BookofMormonEvidence I am breathing just fine. FYI, just because someone does research at one time on something does not make them "obsessive". I didn't start research until college, and certainly wasn't limited to volcanism. I mapped volcanic units as part of my job as a precious metals exploration geologist, which also included igneous intrusions, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks. Before you falsely comment on a person's professional career being "obsessive" in your video without any knowledge of it is where you are crossing the line legally. Calling attention to your conduct is not bullying in any way, I am putting you on notice of my legal rights. Calling me a bully for informing you of my legal rights is also crossing a similar legal line. I have never had a problem with objective academic grade discussion of my research. Never will. False assertions related to my character and professional competence will certainly result in action on my part. Forget about getting sidetracked on the personal aspersion, I think it most telling that you failed to answer any of the items provided in the comments. Why didn't you answer them? The answer is fairly obvious, they are wrong.
Where did I provide ANY comment on your professional career? I simply, and I believe correctly, stated thar you have an obsession with volcanics, which seems justified given the additional information you provided. You literally were professionally looking for volcanic areas in your search for precious metals. You begin your book by stating that from your very first breath, you had a connection to volcanoes, right? And then you go on to show that connection on your mission and profession. You can't even admit that volcanoes have been a major interest for you? Really? After all that talk about volcanoes in your life? Come on...
Now take everything described in the New Madrid earthquakes and multiply them by one hundred, and you get what is actually described in The Book Of Mormon. Oh and move it one hundred miles to the North, where instead of getting more and stronger earthquakes, there's almost no earthquakes, and all small. The exact opposite of The Book Of Mormon. EPIC FAIL.
Your average ancient city like the city of David are around 40 acres in size. The largest sand boil was from the New Madrid Earthquake zone was 1.4 miles long, probably upto 30 feet deep, covering 136 acres. Just that one sand boil could cover three ancient cities. The New Madrid Earthquake zone is the easiest place to have cities buried quickly from sand boils compared to any other place in the world. Most cities are built by rivers. Sand boils are most common near rivers. The Hopewell Interaction Sphere is concentrated over the Mississippi River drainage basin. It wouldn't be surprising to have whole villages of the Hopewell get buried under sand or get drowned in the sea like what happened to the indians when Reelfoot Lake was formed in the 1811 earthquake.
@@Eluzian86 As usual you are overlooking the qualifiers. It wasn't a sandhill the buried Moronihah, or even a mountain, which has to be 1,000 feet or higher, not 30 feet, it was a Great Mountain that formed in an hour, from cast up earth, not boiled up sand. Making a mountain out of a mole hill, or in this case, a great mountain out of a small sand hill. And it wasn't flooded by a shallow pond, it was Drowned in the Depths of the Sea. It wasn't ground that had a few cracks in a few places, it was the rocks that were broken up and found inseams and in cracks across the Whole face of the earth. And of course it wasn't in only the land of the Lamanites, it was worse in the North in the land of the Nephites. Around the Great Lakes area there has only ever been small earthquakes and few of those. Plus even the Great Lakes are only lakes, and aren't deep enough to have depths. It takes extreme exaggerations to declare the Heartland as matching The Book Of Mormon.
@@bartonbagnes4605 The 1,000 feet or higher to qualify as a mountain is what we say in the modern day, doesn't mean that is the same qualifier definition was used by the people in ancient times. People can often describe things in relative terms. I grew up in Salt Lake City surrounded by mountains. I moved to West Virginia and saw the Appalachian that are called mountains, but to me they were hills. If I lived in a flat plain area and sand blew out of the ground and covered my village under a 30 foot tall mound, I might consider it to be, or at least call it, a great mountain. Why wouldn't a person call something a mountain that just buried all of what they would call a city? Also, if water floods in and drowns your village, you can't see the tops of your homes, you can't see the bottom of the water and the water may have flooded farther than you can swim or possibly farther than you could see such as with the formation of Reelfoot Lake, why would it be ridiculous to say your village was drowned in the depths of the sea? We call the Great Lakes lakes, but in the ancient Middle East and actually, even today, basically every body of water of significance is called a sea, so being drowned in fresh water could easily be termed "drowning in the depths of the sea". I think you are considering things to much through a modern lense and your subjective experience.
@@bartonbagnes4605 ...and how does a sand boil blowing earth upto 100 feet in the air and forming a mound that covers an entire ancient city not count as casting up earth to form a great mountain?
@@Eluzian86 Because a MOUNTAIN has to be at least 1,000 feet, NOT 30 feet. And a GREAT MOUNTAIN has to be much taller than that. 30 feet is a tiny HILL. You get taller hills than that in the middle of MANY cities. Besides I made a mistake, it was carried up, not cast up. That would be more like the earth tilting or folding, or perhaps lava flowing out of the earth piling up on top of itself, though that is the least likely. Whichever it is is irrelevant anyways, because you don't even have the sand boils where the Nephites were, so no Nephite city could have been buried under sand.🤦🏻♂️
Rod'sdepth of spirit and knowledge are amazing. He has studied and learned from so many sources and he always puts the importance of the Spirit in all of his conversations.
Thank you for watching and your kind comment.
Heartland for sure is the place, the land of liberty, the land choice above all other lands. The land of the New Jerusalem which is the same and of the Jaredites, Nephites and Lamanites.🙏🏽
I too had said the geology isn't so important to detect from the B o M because the book is true UNTIL I saw and looked through a copy of "Exploring the Book of Mormon in America's Heartland" that a sister who I used to visit teach has. I never understood the Meso theory but when I saw this book it was miraculous the confirmation I received. It was similar to what I felt when I joined the Church, obtaining a copy for myself to investigate this more. My testimony of the Heartland model is as strong as my testimony of the Gospel. Thank you Rod Meldrum for your efforts and research in bringing this to light.
WOW!!! The video on volcanoes and this video had my draw dropping. It just shows me that the truths that god is trying to reveal are always hidden in plain sight. I have grown up in the US my entire life and never once have I heard about this fault line or the disaster that happened there in the 1800s. This is incredible information. Thanks for sharing this.
So grateful that it helps to clarify the reality of the Book of Mormons history.
Rod needs to actually update his research before he presents. Do a search on Examining "Geology and the Heartland Geography Model for the Book of Mormon" and "Mormonism with the Murph" and watch that video if you are interested in an objective scientific discussion. A volcano (and a regional earthquake) is needed to account for all of the elements identified in the Book of Mormon. Primarily the elements that are lacking in an "earthquake only" model such as the Heartland or Baja is the lack of an extensive mist of darkness that covers all of the land northward and land southward. Sand blows, sand boils, earthquake dust, and earthquake smog only occur approximate (adjacent or close to the fault). Also, the BOM requires that individuals be killed by the "the vapor of smoke and of darkness". The gases coming out of earthquake fissures are in low concentrations in the air and have not been documented as fatal. With respect to the New Madrid specifically and the heartland model, the BOM says the greatest damage was in the land northward, not the land southward. As is shown by the potential earthquake damage map that Rod shows in others of his videos, in order to collapse primitive structures, it must be over Level VII. If you look at the map that Rod has shown in other videos, you will see that Level VII is does not extend into the areas required by the Heartland model. Ringing bells and rattling tableware is a very low level of shaking. Also, one problem with the New Madrid earthquakes, partly because it is a deep fault, powerful earthquakes sufficient to cause any damage, occur for weeks and last periodically over months and even years. The BOM event is over in 3 days. Finally, the word volcano is not found in Biblical Hebrew or ancient Egyptian, so "great storm", which was used in the Bible, is an appropriate translation of the event. In the 1792 eruption of the San Martin volcano, which is the likely BOM volcano in the Mesoamerican models, it was described by the natives as a "great storm".
Jerry, I appreciate your attempt to address the information in this video. As someone who has been fixated with volcanoes from an early age, according to your Book on the geology of the Book of Mormon, I understand how you would tend to look at the 3rd Nephi destruction through the lens of volcanics. However, the word volcano was known in Joseph's day as Noah Websters 1828 dictionary attests. Had a volcano been involved, it's hard to imagine why the word volcano is never mentioned. Clearly the Lord and Joseph Smith could have used it to clarify the cause of the destruction, but, as pointed out in the video, there are no observations given in the text that definitively indicate anything exclusively volcanic. No ash, no lava, etc. On the other hand earthquakes are specifically mentioned multiple times. As mentioned in the video, every single observation made of the destruction, 28 in all, was, in fact, experienced during the 1811-1812 earthquake sequence. There is no need to invoke a never mentioned phenomenon (a volcano) to explain the observations if invoking the New Madrid earthquakes.
Nowhere does the text explicitly state that the mists of darkness covered both the land northward and southward, only that they experienced 3 days of the darkness "upon the face of the land" which doesn't specify the geographical extent of the darkness, only that it was observed.
Nowhere in the text does it state that people died as a result of breathing the mist, but rather it does state that people lived through it (3 Nephi 8:23). So your assumed 'requirement' is incorrect.
Geographically, the lands northward or southward obviously depend on one's frame of reference. The lands of Nephi, Zarahemla and Bountiful were said to be north of the land of First Inheritance and thus northward. In the Heartland model these equate to Tennessee, Iowa/Illinois, and Ohio, all of which fall into the destruction maps of the 1811-1812 sequence. Our understanding is that the earthquake sequence on the New Madrid in 3 Nephi was considerably larger than the 1811 sequence, which would extend the range of damage.
The text makes no mention of collapsing all their structures, so that is not a requirement. In fact the temple at Bountiful (Ohio) apparently sustained no to little damage as no rebuilding is mentioned or was required. Ringing bells and shaking tableware happened hundreds of miles from the epicenter in New York, Boston and South Carolina, not even close to the epicenter in Missouri. Destruction near the epicenter would have been massive, as attested by both the text and the historical accounts.
The most massive earthquake shocks and destruction in 1811 fell within 3-4 days, just as described by the text. So that isn't a problem as you claimed.
Your assumption that because the word volcano doesn't appear in Biblical Hebrew or Egyptian and thus means that it is equivalent to a great storm demonstrates your obsession to see everything through the lens of volcanics. As I have traveled through Biblical lands and Egypt I am not aware of any active volcanos. Although there is evidence of ancient volcanoes, none were active in Biblical times, which could more easily explain why they are not mentioned.
It is said that to a hammer, everything is a nail. Likewise to a volcanologist, everything is seen through the lens of volcanism. You can't un-see the fact that no volcanism is mentioned - or required - by the Book of Mormon text of the destruction in 3rd Nephi. But I commend your valiant effort to insert it.
@@BookofMormonEvidence First of all, your assertion that the Introduction to my book indicates an obsession with volcanoes is absolutely false. It says no such thing. I had not interest in volcanoes until I attended university, and only then just as a part of the overall study of geology. The Introduction to the book says no more than that. What you have asserted about me in this regard to my profession an career here and elsewhere on the internet I consider slander and find it unbecoming as a member of the Church. As a result I have actually retained an attorney to review the disparaging things you have been asserting about my character in these various public forums. I just apply the science. Anyway, to respond to some of your false assertions about the Book of Mormon:
1. The vapor (3 Nephi 10:12-13) identifies at least some of the methods of how the wicked were killed, and it includes being "overpowered by the vapor of smoke and darkness." It did kill people.
12 And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints,
who were spared--
13 And they were spared and were not sunk and buried up in the earth; and they were not drowned in the depths of the sea; and they were not burned by fire, neither were they fallen upon and crushed to death; and they were not carried away in the whirlwind; neither were they overpowered by the vapor of smoke
and of darkness.
2. Your assertion that the BOM text does not indicate the collapsing of structures is false.
3 Nephi 8:14
14 And many great and notable cities were sunk, and many were burned, and many were shaken till the buildings thereof had fallen to the earth, and the inhabitants thereof were slain, and the places were left desolate.
1 Nephi 12:4
4 And it came to pass that I saw a mist of darkness on the face of the land of promise; and I saw lightnings, and I heard thunderings, and earthquakes, and all manner of tumultuous noises; and I saw the earth and the rocks, that they rent; and I saw mountains tumbling into pieces; and I saw the plains of the earth, that they were broken up; and I saw many cities that they were sunk; and I saw many that they were burned with fire; and I saw many that did tumble to the earth, because of the quaking thereof.
3. Your discussion that there were no active volcanoes in the Egypt/Israel area makes my point exactly! They had no word for volcano, likely because they observed none. The fact that there is documentation that the natives in Mesoamerica described a volcanic eruption as a "great storm" is evidence of the Mesoamerican model, not the Heartland.
4. You assert that vapor of darkness did not cover all the land. This is false and contrary to the text of the Book of Mormon. As just cited, 1 Nephi 12:4 said that the darkness was on the face of the land of promise, and 3 Nephi 8:20 requires that it cover "all the face of the land"
3 Nephi 8:20
20 And it came to pass that there was thick darkness upon all the face of the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof who had not fallen could feel the vapor of darkness;
5. Although you have ignored it repeatedly, the BOM text requires the bulk of the destruction to occur in the land northward, not southward (3 Nephi 8:12-14). The cities of Jacob and Jacob-ugath are indicated to be at the far end of the land northward, and it had hills and valleys left of it and the people were buried in the depths of the earth and Jacob-ugath burned with fire (3 Nephi 9:8-9).
Come now, Jerry, and take a calm breath. A quick review of the first paragraph of your book is in order to understand where I got the idea of an obsession you have with volcanoes. To ensure that I am not taking something out of context, here's a photo of that paragraph from your book. I can't seem to add the image, but here are your opening words.
"INTRODUCTION
My first breath of life was taken on the extinct volcano Ko'olau. As a young missionary in Sicily I sat up late at night fascinated by the bright red incandescent lava streams, moving down the slopes of Mount Etna, hearing the booms of dynamite detonated by desperate Italian geologists and engineers who were trying to divert the lava coming off the volcano to keep it from destroying homes and buildings. As a young man, I spent months traipsing through the deserts of Nevada mapping and drilling ancient volcanic deposits with the hopes of detecting traces of gold deposited in or beneath the volcanic deposits and shockingly, I actually found some."
Your interest in volcanoes seem to have been an impetus to your becoming a geologist. In your book you are very clear about your preferred Mesoamerica centric geographic location of the Book of Mormon, your belief exclusively in the 'Sorensen model' and your insistence on volcanics being an "essential element" of the events described in 3rd Nephi. Don't make me quote you from your own book to back up the above facts.
My comment was not to disparage your obsession with volcanics but simply to point it out. There's nothing wrong with having a deep interest in it, only that it could affect your viewpoints as demonstrated. There is no need to waste your money on a frivolous lawsuit you couldn't possibly win as I haven't disparaged you in any way. I am simply pointing out that your primary assumptions may be incorrect. You have taken issue with me and my research publically, so you opened the door for a public response. I'm sorry if you cannot abide alternative viewpoints, but your threat doesn't scare me or keep me from responding. Actually, it demonstrates the common methodology of many Mesoamerica proponents. If they are questioned or rebutted, they resort to threats and lawsuits rather than engage in discussion. Thank you for your demonstration of bullying in public. Should you choose to pursue your defamation lawsuit against me, I'll be sure to bring up your public replies to the video and your threats of lawsuits.
I am simply expressing my first amendment right to engage in a public discussion on the topic. If you don't want a public discussion than I suggest not engaging in public discussion in the first place.
I have no animosity toward you and would enjoy a more personal discussion if you'd like. But I doubt you'd be interested in doing so. As a professional scientist I would hope that you would be interested in critiques of your research, a sort of peer review, as it were. I am only taking issue with your primary assumptions, not your personal character. I have been respectful and haven't called you names or questioned your motives, only your assumptions, which I believe may be challenged.
We are both faithful members of the church we both love and students of the Book we are discussing. How about we act as such and drop the threats of lawsuits?
@@BookofMormonEvidence I am breathing just fine. FYI, just because someone does research at one time on something does not make them "obsessive". I didn't start research until college, and certainly wasn't limited to volcanism. I mapped volcanic units as part of my job as a precious metals exploration geologist, which also included igneous intrusions, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks. Before you falsely comment on a person's professional career being "obsessive" in your video without any knowledge of it is where you are crossing the line legally. Calling attention to your conduct is not bullying in any way, I am putting you on notice of my legal rights. Calling me a bully for informing you of my legal rights is also crossing a similar legal line. I have never had a problem with objective academic grade discussion of my research. Never will. False assertions related to my character and professional competence will certainly result in action on my part.
Forget about getting sidetracked on the personal aspersion, I think it most telling that you failed to answer any of the items provided in the comments. Why didn't you answer them? The answer is fairly obvious, they are wrong.
Where did I provide ANY comment on your professional career? I simply, and I believe correctly, stated thar you have an obsession with volcanics, which seems justified given the additional information you provided. You literally were professionally looking for volcanic areas in your search for precious metals. You begin your book by stating that from your very first breath, you had a connection to volcanoes, right? And then you go on to show that connection on your mission and profession. You can't even admit that volcanoes have been a major interest for you? Really? After all that talk about volcanoes in your life? Come on...
Now take everything described in the New Madrid earthquakes and multiply them by one hundred, and you get what is actually described in The Book Of Mormon. Oh and move it one hundred miles to the North, where instead of getting more and stronger earthquakes, there's almost no earthquakes, and all small. The exact opposite of The Book Of Mormon. EPIC FAIL.
Your average ancient city like the city of David are around 40 acres in size. The largest sand boil was from the New Madrid Earthquake zone was 1.4 miles long, probably upto 30 feet deep, covering 136 acres. Just that one sand boil could cover three ancient cities. The New Madrid Earthquake zone is the easiest place to have cities buried quickly from sand boils compared to any other place in the world.
Most cities are built by rivers. Sand boils are most common near rivers. The Hopewell Interaction Sphere is concentrated over the Mississippi River drainage basin. It wouldn't be surprising to have whole villages of the Hopewell get buried under sand or get drowned in the sea like what happened to the indians when Reelfoot Lake was formed in the 1811 earthquake.
@@Eluzian86 As usual you are overlooking the qualifiers. It wasn't a sandhill the buried Moronihah, or even a mountain, which has to be 1,000 feet or higher, not 30 feet, it was a Great Mountain that formed in an hour, from cast up earth, not boiled up sand. Making a mountain out of a mole hill, or in this case, a great mountain out of a small sand hill. And it wasn't flooded by a shallow pond, it was Drowned in the Depths of the Sea. It wasn't ground that had a few cracks in a few places, it was the rocks that were broken up and found inseams and in cracks across the Whole face of the earth. And of course it wasn't in only the land of the Lamanites, it was worse in the North in the land of the Nephites. Around the Great Lakes area there has only ever been small earthquakes and few of those. Plus even the Great Lakes are only lakes, and aren't deep enough to have depths. It takes extreme exaggerations to declare the Heartland as matching The Book Of Mormon.
@@bartonbagnes4605 The 1,000 feet or higher to qualify as a mountain is what we say in the modern day, doesn't mean that is the same qualifier definition was used by the people in ancient times. People can often describe things in relative terms. I grew up in Salt Lake City surrounded by mountains. I moved to West Virginia and saw the Appalachian that are called mountains, but to me they were hills. If I lived in a flat plain area and sand blew out of the ground and covered my village under a 30 foot tall mound, I might consider it to be, or at least call it, a great mountain. Why wouldn't a person call something a mountain that just buried all of what they would call a city?
Also, if water floods in and drowns your village, you can't see the tops of your homes, you can't see the bottom of the water and the water may have flooded farther than you can swim or possibly farther than you could see such as with the formation of Reelfoot Lake, why would it be ridiculous to say your village was drowned in the depths of the sea?
We call the Great Lakes lakes, but in the ancient Middle East and actually, even today, basically every body of water of significance is called a sea, so being drowned in fresh water could easily be termed "drowning in the depths of the sea".
I think you are considering things to much through a modern lense and your subjective experience.
@@bartonbagnes4605 ...and how does a sand boil blowing earth upto 100 feet in the air and forming a mound that covers an entire ancient city not count as casting up earth to form a great mountain?
@@Eluzian86 Because a MOUNTAIN has to be at least 1,000 feet, NOT 30 feet. And a GREAT MOUNTAIN has to be much taller than that. 30 feet is a tiny HILL. You get taller hills than that in the middle of MANY cities. Besides I made a mistake, it was carried up, not cast up. That would be more like the earth tilting or folding, or perhaps lava flowing out of the earth piling up on top of itself, though that is the least likely. Whichever it is is irrelevant anyways, because you don't even have the sand boils where the Nephites were, so no Nephite city could have been buried under sand.🤦🏻♂️