Are Native Americans Hebrew??? | Book of Mormon Evidence
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 чер 2024
- If the Book of Mormon is real and it came from real events and people and those people have Hebrew roots, where is the DNA? Where is the evidence?
Join us as we talk about some of the Native American ancestry, Haplogroup X, and the Kennewick Man in part 2 of 3.
Ward Radio skit
• Make the Book of Mormo...
bookofmormonevidence.org/book...
______________________________________________________
Learn more about Evidences of the Book of Mormon at bookofmormonevidence.org/
To view more videos like this subscribe to www.bookofmormonevidence.org/...
I don't completely understand everything you guys covered, but I do understand enough of it. It doesn't alter my testimony of the Book of Mormon one bit, just as previous information that appeared contrary to BOM claims didn't affect me. But I do find it extremely informative and fascinating and thank you for your hard work.
You can’t understand it because it’s all lies.
I think it’s interesting people claim to believe the Book of Mormon but then are uniformitarians and not catastrophists. If ya believe in the Book of Mormon then you have to have an open mind and literally believe that it’s possible that 2000 years ago lake bonneville still existed or the massive lake in Nevada still existed or perhaps the inland sea east of Colorado existed or the sea or lake still existed by vernal.
There are Native American petroglyphs of turtles and crocodiles in the desert in eastern Utah. Or look at Bolivia down there at the lake by timupunku that has a lake at like 12000 feet or whatever with sharks and sea horses in a fresh water lake. They’re sea creatures in a fresh water environment. I was shocked when I headed that cause you hear of sea animals going into fresh water but then having to leave. But there’s a lake with sea creatures that have adapted to fresh water.
The book or Mormon has a verse that says from sea to sea is a days journey or something. It’s why Central America makes sense, but if you believe catastrophe can happen then there were plenty of big lakes that existed in the past that could have existed 2000 years ago.
@@claesvanoldenphatt9972 Your in a big and spacious building there buddy!
The atalatl dart embedded in his hip is a known type (Cascade) that was in use from about 9,000-5,000 years ago, It is well dated in many sites, contexts, and assemblage and adds another bounding to his dating. X2 haplogroup has been here far too long for your timeline.
I wished academics would release info about the red head skeletons from love lock cave Nevada. When native Americans tell they killed red heads it’s like hmm. Probably worth looking into.
Then ya got statues at Easter islands with beards and current native Americans can’t grow beards. I’ve heard academics say the Vikings done it so, it had to have been another group.
@@koltoncrane3099 😂 ...and I wish people really understood academia - both it's strengths and weaknesses. If an archaeologist had red headed anglo giants, here in the America, or any other crazy thing like that, they would run, not walk to get it published. Their days begging for research money would be over, something every academic dreams of. But most important of all, their citation counts would go off the charts, and you would see them develop the academic swagger when they walk.
Meanwhile, I'm waiting for them to finally release the fossilized Cardiff Giant to the public so we can finally see the truth of it for ourselves.
So someone or some group couldn't have used that atlatl dart after your claimed dating????????? Horses and buggies/wagons for instance went out with the invention of the piston engine but wait the Amish still use them in the USA over a hundred years after new technology of gas and diesel engines should have pushed them off completely of our roads and so they are "obsolete" and yet the Amish will likely continue to use them for at least hundreds of years to come. Archaeology obviously hasn't dug up every atlatl dart in the world and so not every atlatl dart can be accounted for and it's not like archaeologists and/or dating methods haven't been wrong before and will continue to be wrong since those who invent the sciences involved are mortal and are imperfect.
@@chucklearnslithics3751 Academia????? LOLOLOLOL "Cardiff Giant"????? Kinda like how the "Piltdown 'Man' " "missing link" hoax fooled scientists until 1953?????? Do you honestly think that archaeologists have dug up every skeleton in the Americas?????? Old theories die hard!!! For hundreds of years the Siberian Land Bridge was theorized to be THE way that the American continents were populated... Then they found settlements in the extreme Southern end of South America that are being dated prior to the time when the Siberian Land Bridge allegedly appeared. They also obtained ice core samples that show that the flora and fauna wasn't available and/or abundant enough for people to migrate across from Siberia on foot even when the Siberian Land Bridge was allegedly available. Scientists want to keep the idea that the ancestors of the Native Americas were just too dumb to have built ships and sailed to the Americas because for some reason they want to preserve the idea that Native Americans and their ancestors were always just ignorant savages.
@@robca6013 Ah. You've read Dr Stanford's analysis that it's a resharpened, older, Haskett. I'm glad you bring it up. This is the only scholarly review claiming it's anything other than a Cascade type and the source of a previous commenter's Wikipedia search that led them to the "it's contested" conclusion. 1- It's not uncommon for point types to be reused along the edges of cultural time boundaries, but that percentage demonstrably fades the further in time you go. Haskett is far enough in time away from Kennewick man that this would be an impressively rare find in his hip. Not impossible, but what are the odds of it? Slim. 1a- If you want to ignore the dating and stick with Stanford's conclusion, that it's a Haskett, then Kennewick man is even older, not younger. 2- Stanford uses a thicker tip as his nearly singular proof. However in the same paper he is unknowingly arguing against himself when he includes pictures of a Cascade with an edge "stack", which in side view, also produces the same thick tip profile observed in the Kennewick x-rays. These edge stacks are not uncommon in lithic production, nor are thicker tips uncommon, due to unpredictability in the rock. 3- Stanford's lithic morphology analysis has been highly controversial in other point type analysis. He is infamous for his "Solutrean hypothesis" wherein he speculated that Native American Clovis people learned biface production from Western European Solutreans because they look somewhat morphologically similar. Despite Solutrean culture being ~21k years ago and Clovis being ~12k ya, an 11k year gap between them, and being an ocean apart. He held fast to the idea that, if something looks similar, and all other context is ignored, it must be the same thing.
I find it hilarious that our digestive systems are more closely biologically related to pigs and bears, than to apes! One of my ag teachers use to say, “You and I and the pig”
What makes the most sense to me is the theory that the heartland peoples were at least part of those that migrated from the Mesoamerican area. Makes is very simple.
??? Where did you come up with that theory? Mesoamerica has nothing to do with Hapolgroup X or the Book of Mormon Native American people who have Hebrew DNA.
@@joes6525 I got it from FAIR. Allen Wyatt did a very good paper on it. There is at least one other. The BOM tells us of MANY people that left the area. Where did they go? The millennia of separation and mixing or not mixing with others can easily wipe out any DNA similarities.
What makes most sense to me is IT NEVER HAPPENED. Problem solved.
From what little I know Haplogroup X is mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down from the mother. It is important to remember that Ephraim and Mannaseh had an Egyptian mother. Therefore we can’t assume that they had the same mitochondrial DNA as their uncles and cousins. Did Joseph have only 2 sons and no daughters? We can’t assume that Lehi or Ishmael had to have “Hebrew” mitochondrial DNA.
Ancient Egyptians have been found to be similar to several modern Arab populations genetically, so that's really a non-issue
I think that is a good point.
What about Sariah? What about Ishmael's wife? What about Ishmael's sons' wives? What about the Mulekites? We need to think bigger and broader.
I have recently heard that Ishmael’s sons were married to Lehi’s daughters.
Yes, haplogroup X is mitochondrial DNA passed down through the mother. So for the Book of Mormon we would actually be talking about the mitochondrial dna from Ishmael's wife and Sariah, and the women in the Mulekite group.
I love how they completely ignore anything that doesn't support or straight contradicts their theory. Like Daryl "Dusty" Crawford, or Lone Bull, as his Blackfoot name is, that he is the man with the oldest ancestral DNA tested in the Americas, estimated to date back to 17,000B.C. And what were his earliest ancestors? Polynesians, they figured that his ancestors landed on the West Coast of Mexico and then migrated North. That lines up well with the Hopi legend of their ancestors traveling across great waters sealed in reeds, with islands rising out of the water for them to resupply, and sinking back down afterwards, described by people who didn't know about the horizon or that the earth is round, their legend says they landed on the West Coast. They also didn't mention the 10,000 year old Australasian DNA they found in a cave in the Amazon. Nor did they bother to mention that Haplogroup X has been identified in skeletal remains of Olmecs and Mayan in Mesoamerica. But most of all they left out that it has been proven that the Phoenicians were mining copper around the Great Lakes area for centuries, traveling for months across the Atlantic, which certainly would get lonely with only male companions. You can be sure they left a sizable amount of Middle Eastern DNA behind, which would explain the presence of Haplogroup X, no Israelites required. Of course the Phoenicians wouldn't explain traces of Haplogroup X in the Olmecs and Mayans, that would have to come from somewhere else. As would the very Egyptian like culture, writing system (including the only other culture to use Cartouches) and words of Hebrew and Egyptian origin found in the Uto-Aztecan language group of Southwestern United States and Mesoamerica. Nor do they mention all the Mayan history that lines up in date and description what is described in The Book Of Mormon.
And Asians are of the house of Manasseh and the Lehite’s are likewise of the house of Manasseh!!!!
No. Kennewick Man has X2 in his actual mtDNA. It's not from "genetic molecular clock" modeling at all.
You can try to argue his C14 dating was contaminated, but heis dating is still bounded by the volcanic layers (would love to see the papers suggesting otherwise), which still makes him older than ~6k years, and X2 showing it already in the Americas.
I know Kennewick Man and DNA is a sensitive topic, but this is why I still encourage my Native American friends to allow their ancestor's remains, especially when they're very old, to still be genetically and C14 tested. All the evidence continues to demonstrate and cement just how long they have been here and strengthens their position in it and it's history. They have always known that. But modern research into their ancient ancestors proves it. Theological apologists have to constantly invent new dances when faced with that kind of hard evidence, because it's stronger than their own traditions.
His dating isn't bound by the volcanic layers. He was protectively buried into those older layers. Your logic is the same as saying that a person is as old as the dirt they're buried in.
@@Lamanitehistory And what do you make of the Cascade atlatl dart point embedded in his hip? Cascade points are well dated at numerous sites and were used between 5k and 9k years ago. Which also add another bounding evidence to his dating.
@chucklearnslithics3751 It was a spearhead, and there is debate over the type of point it was.
@@Lamanitehistory Many and maybe most archaeologists consider atlatl darts and spears as the same thing - so your calling it a "spearhead" adds no relevance or distinction to the point. The one in Kennewick man is perfectly inside the average size range and shape of a Cascade point, regardless of whether it was thrown or lunged into him. The discussion of the type is very minor, but largely agreed Cascade is the most likely type. There are no other proposed types that will change the dating in any meaningful manner in time and place.
What science "proves" is that the scientific theories need to be re-worked to get it to "fit into" ever changing theories because new discoveries will cause old assumptions that are tied to old theories need to be round filed because obviously imperfect ignorant men even academics make assumptions that don't hold water. Since you nor any of the academic pals were "there" when Kennewick man died and was "buried"... They can only "best guess" how long he was buried where he was discovered. All sorts of unknown factors could have affected his C-14, etc. although academics will try to give off an air of just knowing the "facts" that aren't facts but just best guesses.
were hebrews actually American descendants?
Pres Nelson has said the words "gather scattered Isreal." The teaching, though, primarily focuses on doing temple work, family history and converting people to join the church and receive exaltation through lds exclusive ordinances. The gospel and the church have been conflated by its leaders. Chief Midegah speaks truth! If the leaders believe in gathering Isreal, and it's the most important thing we can do, then lead the members. Be the example. It's crazy how most members won't act unless the prophet says. We've put our trust in men and the arm of flesh. I do hope the church will repent and be honest.
Now you need Non-LDS scientists to agree.
Just kind of sad, really. Desperate and sad.
So much wasted energy. Isn’t there some good they could be doing?
Careful critiquing the molecular dna clock. Low information mitochondrial dna (mtDNA), which is where your own X2 "evidence" comes from always changes slowly. Without it you have nothing because all the other ancient dna testing that has developed, since the 1998 mtDNA haplogroup X discovery, shows zero sign of a Semitic people in the Americas. You smack talk that molecular clock modeling too much and your X group should have mutated away by now. It's molecular longevity is the only thing you have a literal prayer for to keep you fighting in a game you've already lost.
Haplogroup X has been in North America for 12,000-36,000 years. Reliance on haplogroup x for book of Mormon validity is laughable.
What if the whole premise of how they date genetic drift is flawed?
Did you watch the entire video? They spent a good deal of time discussing, and showing evidence in support of, their belief that the accepted date range for the emergence of haplogroup X is wrong. In summary, the accepted date range is based on the 'mitochondrial clock'. This clock is based on the assumption that genetic mutations occur at a very low rate -- less than one mutation every 1,000 years. Given the number of mutations we see between the DNA of haplogroup X from from ancient Americans and their descendants living today, we calculate it would take between 12,000 and 36,000 years for those mutations to have occurred. But, as discussed in the video, studies comparing the DNA of grandmothers and granddaughters show that genetic mutations occur much more frequently -- 7 to 10 times faster -- than the assumed rate of mutation used in the mitochondrial clock. Using the rate of genetic change from these more recent studies, it appears that haplogroup X showed up in the Americas 2,000-3,000 years ago. This date range, which is arguably more accurate than the one produced by the mitorchondiral clock, is consistent with the Book of Mormon.
None of this proves that the Book of Mormon is true. All it demonstrates is that there are good faith, evidence based, arguments to be made that the DNA from some Native American tribes is consistent with the Book of Mormon. DNA doesn't prove the Book of Mormon is true; nor does it prove it false.
@@tomaswmitchellphotographyThen Haplogroup X is completely screwed because it should have been short lived and gone by now. Mitochondria dna's incredible longevity is the only hope they have because all other genetic testing of ancient American remains, that has developed since the 1998 discovery of Haplogroup X mtDNA, shows no sign of a Semitic people. It's like he's letting air out of his own life vest, trying to find where he has just enough left to keep his head above water. The tiny mitochondria inside your cells has its own unique DNA, unique from the rest of your cell. mtDNA comes exclusively from your mother, unlike the rest of your DNA which is a mix of your parents. Because mtDNA mutates so slowly it is far easier to detect and map and was therefore the earliest DNA testing performed in ancient remains. Since 1998 the rest of ancient genome testing has opened up. They're attacking the mitochondria molecular drift clock out of necessity because they need the X mutation to be younger than the 30K years the models predicts that it mutated and came into being. However as more and more ancient remains continue to be tested, the mtDNA model is holding up and has already proven it's older than Meldrum's timeline requires. He believes if he can cast enough doubt on the molecular clock models he can keep his hypothesis alive, but this necessarily puts pressure on his own hypothesis because then he needs to explain why X still survives even till today if the mtDNA clock runs as fast as he needs it to. There is far less emphasis put on mtDNA these days as the science has so vastly expanded since the 1998 finding he so desperately clings to.