Great article which makes extremely valid points! I have spent my life in the biological sciences field and have watched less than honest people use junk science to mislead people or as an attempt to "prove" a point. The counter for this abuse of "science" is a thing called peer review or consensous. This article is excellent peer review! I doubt it will change one person's testimony nor should it. I for one am totally convinced the B. of M. is true because of what is between the covers on the pages of this great book, not in DNA molecules. I personally know hundred of people who believe Jesus is the Christ because of the B.of M. I do not know one person who believes that because of science. Sign seeking (looking for proof) was and is condemed by He of whom the B. of M. testifies!

Israelites mixed with people of surrounding nations for centuries - and Ishmaels's wife could, indeed, have carried Asian DNA. Large amounts of DNA were lost during conflicts (particularly World War 2). DNA of a modern Jew may bear no resemblance to the DNA of Israel's 12 sons. What was the source of "Israelite" DNA tested?

Mixing took place with Lehi's people for centuries, and large portions of DNA were eliminated during their horrific wars.

After the New World was "discovered," Native American blood mixed with Spanish, English, French, etc. Large amounts of native DNA was lost from illness (introduction of smallpox, etc.), wars, the "Trail of Tears," etc. DNA of modern Native Americans may have little resemblance to DNA from 1st Century Native Americans.

Comparison of modern day Israelite blood with modern day Native American blood is meaningless; totally irrelevant.

Another consideration - The Inuit have noses with rather flat bridges; very Asian. I've seen profiles of Plains Indians with very prominent hooked noses. Not very Asian.

The article got one thing right, believing the BoM should be a matter of faith not science.

As for the DNA evidence, the average person (even many well educated people) don't know enough about DNA to even make a decision based on it. I also don't know if I trust the judgement of scientists either. There is so much junk science out there trying to "prove" there is or is not global warming or any other number of topics all based on personal beliefs or political agendas.

Science in these modern times is just like the scriptures, you can make them say anything you want to say by ignoring anything you don't want to hear.

Finally, and this disturbs me the most, science seems to be continually trying to learn and find answers whereas religion seems to already have them and refuses to change in light of new evidence. This general outlook on knowledge favors science. Religion needs to adapt or it will be left behind and become irrelavant. The pusuit of truth means change at times when new knowledge is found. Science does that, does religion?

I agree with Ridgerunner, but in no way agree with Rebecca.

Instereo I feel sorry for people like you, God changes for no one. It not matter who we thank we are it is steel God who sets the standards for us to live my. It is man who is trying to understand God's science and his ways. One day we all will come to this reality when we stand before our maker and to be judged for all we say, do, and thank. we all must make our own chooses in life and then go from there I will not impose my belief on you but you seam to thank that religion must change with the times and to me that is arrogant thinking for one who does not understand the ways of God.

So it is now doctrine there were millions of people inhabiting the Americas when the Isrealites landed? And that the entire boM took place in a "very small" area? Rebecca, no offense but you make no sense. If palins indians "hooked" noses are eveidence they are not of asian origin then the DNA for "hooked" noses would be present. Also, if Plains indians fit with Lammanites (I believe that's what your implying) then that shoots down the limited geogrophy theory. Apologists take issues and defend them individually even if the different arguments contradict each other. The key is to keep them isolated. Your church may be true, but if it is it can only be proved by faith because all empirical data says no. But you are free to believe without any disrespect. But when these apologists attack the science they open the door for factual attacks. Its called debating.

To Rebecca,
There were not as many other Europeans nationalities who mixed with the Indians as did the Spanish. The Spanish were the main ones...NOT the English! Otherwise northern Americans would all look like Mexico's Mexicans. As you know they do not! You have it all wrong!

It appears that Mr. Peterson completely disregarded the Wentworth Letter in which Joseph Smith clearly states that the American Indians are direct descendant's of the Lamanites.

Also, Mr. Peterson is also disregarding several statements by prophets and apostles that also state the American Indians are direct descendants of the Lamanites.

You just can't pick and choose what you want to use in your research.

Otis - There's a difference between a prophet speculating on something and church doctrine. All Joseph Smith said in the Wentworth letter is "The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country." Could Joseph Smith have been under the impression that all American Indians were descendants of the BofM people and yet still be a prophet? Sure. He was merely giving his opinion, although he thought it was true. Now if we had scripture that Joseph Smith wrote down that said "Thus saith the Lord; All American Indians are descendants of the BofM people, without exception" then that would be another matter. The same goes for any other church leader. It has long been the prevailing thought that all American Indians were descended from the BofM people. But it has never been church doctrine. As archaeological research has been performed much evidence has been found to contradict such an idea, although the evidence in no way proves the BofM false. It merely proves ideas people have had about the BofM to be false.

Fredd, in the spirit of open and honest debate, I'd like to point out that there is plenty of empirical evidence that corroborates the BofM. Just do a search on Google for "book of mormon archaeology" and then read Jeff Lindsay's or FAIRlds's pages.

Also, there never has been a church doctrine about the number of people inhabiting the Americas when the Israelites landed. Your are mistaking "anything a church leader says" but the doctrine of the church. The doctrine of the church is quite limited in quantity.

This is just more of the argument from ignorance: "Science can't PROVE that native Americans are NOT descendants of Lehi and all those others he brought with him, therefore, the BOM IS TRUE!"

Too bad Peterson never took a logic class and has no idea what science is all about.

Please let me know when leading NON-LDS scientist add their input. Until then I see conflict of interest.

The problem with your comment is that there was no indication that Joseph was speculating. Here are a few of the several hundreds of comments made by prophets/apostels (they are not speculating):

"The Lamanites, now a down-trodden people, are of the literal house of Israel. The curse of God has followed them as it has done the Jews, though the Jews have not been darkened in their skin as have the Lamanites."

- Prophet Wilford Woodruff, Journal of Discourses, v. 22, p. 173

"The Nephites suffered extinction about 400 A.D., but the Lamanites lived on in their degraded course, and are today the American Indians."

- Apostle James Talmage, Apostle, Jesus the Christ, 23rd ed., p. 49

"Not only in the Book of Mormon are the descendants of Lehi called Jews, but also in the Doctrine and Covenants. In section 19, this is found: 'Which is my word to the Gentile, that soon it may go to the Jew, of whom the Lamanites are a remnant, that they may believe the gospel, and, look not for a Messiah to come who has already come.'"

- Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, v. 3, p. 264

To Mormon DNA,

“The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have become white and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, fifteen of the twenty were as light as Anglos; five were darker but equally delightsome. The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters on the reservation. At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl-sixteen sitting between the dark father and mother, and she was several shades lighter than her parents on the same reservation, subject to the same sun and wind and weather. There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was some shades lighter than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and delightsomeness. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.”

- Prophet Spencer W. Kimball, General Conference, Oct. 1960

I don't see how you can say that Spencer W. Kimball was speculating:

"About twenty-five centuries ago, a hardy group left the comforts of a great city, crossed a desert, braved an ocean, and came to the shores of this, their promised land. There were two large families, those of Lehi and Ishmael, who in not many centuries numbered hundreds of millions of people on these two American continents."

- Prophet Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 601

This is malarkey!

I was born near Bryce Canyon Utah, and I had my DNA work done, and it mostly all goes back into many of the great Kings of Europe. Some of our family names are English, Jewish and Scottish. I was very happy to get these interesting results on DNA for our family. I also believe it is quite accurate.

Maybe I have missed something, but I believe that the Book of Mormon says that all those in the lands who followed after Nephi were considered Nephites, and all others were considered Lamanites (eventhough it could have been broken down into Jacobites, Ishmaelites, etc..)

So technically, any peoples who were in the Americas at that time who were not Nephites were Lamanites...whether they descended from Lehi or not. Does that clear up the DNA issue?

The posters after me spoke more clearly then I could on the subject. My point is when the apologist take on science then they debate is wide open. When one speaks of their faith we should be respectful. Of course if they try to push their faith one is free to resort to the empirical evidence to quiet them. There is no evidence of the BoM or it would be touted all over Utah and BYU. Instead there is speculation that certain things MAY be possibly linked to BoM. Again isolated examples, taking the book as a whole, the evidence for it is sorely lacking. Not that you can't take a passage here or an assertion here and find hypothetical evidence for them. I apply the same test to the bible. At least the vast majority of the places and people are verifiable. Whether Jesus was the son of god or not will always be a matter of faith.

Wow, you're really reaching. Just read the above quotes from the prophets and apostles, especially the ones from Spencer W. Kimball. It addresses and answers your "theory".

Having faith is good, using your mind (which God gave us) is even better.

“Since the Gospel embraces all truth, there can never be any genuine contradictions between true science and our religion…. I am obliged, as a Latter-day Saint, to believe whatever is true, regardless of the source.”

- Henry Eyring, Faith of a Scientist, p. 12

Actually, you should re-read my post and the above "supposed" Kimball quotes. Nothing I said contradicts or conflicts with what is quoted above.

Read the Book of Mormon again and read what many prophets and apostles have said on the subject.

Glad I can be of assistance.

"...Lamanites are the literal house of Israel" Wilford Woodruff

That above quote pretty much clears up any misconception I may have had on the subject.

And because the "Lamanites are the literal house of Israel" means that they all had to descend from Lehi?

No, it doesn't. Jacob/Israel had 12 sons with numerous descendents. The Lamanites don't have to have Jewish or Lehi DNA to be "literal house of Israel."

Again, what I said does not contradict or conflict with the above quotes.

What about Zelph? Nowhere in the Book of Mormon does it mention the Nephites or Lamanites running into Native Americans.

People who have posted here contradict each other and some even contradict the Church. Most of you are better of not commenting. This subject should be left alone and just put to rest. We are making a mockery of ourselves by dredging up this is over and over. It is embarrassing and yes it makes us look just downright silly to those not of our faith.

When there is so much contention with people there is no way that the spirit of God is dwelling amongst any of you... no way possible. Usually thought the devil is at his best.

Have you checked the devils DNA yet? Are you related?

Oh, yeah, I forget, the Devil hasn't any.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Antis and ex's and axed have no business blogging here. Spread you hate somewhere alse. The d-news needs to develop better policies to keep these people out.

Who can say the native americans are not very very distantly but directly related to the lamanites.

Do you know what DNA markers to look for?

Do know enough about DNA to understansd how markers are lost?

When the lamanites were "cursed" do you know what may have meant genetically?

What the prophets have said or written may very well be true.

Without having full knowledge of everything from full history of all people who lived on the amercan continents to all geneaolgy to DNA how can you say they are not right?

As long as we keep shoving this square peg into this round hole, eventually it will fit.

Once a non-LDS scholar conducts a peer review and verifies Peterson's research, only then will I take him seriously.

Why is Fredd's name spelled with two Ds?

As with all of Daniel Petersen's "answers to critics", it is one thing to answer, but an entirely different thing to answer WELL. Petersen does not answer well. He only reveals that he has no understanding of science and the philosophy of science, and he certainly doesn't have a grasp on argumentation and logic!

For that matter, neither does Marvin Andersen, but thanks for playing Marv!

Next--

Don't confuse Uriah with facts, (the fact that DNA can't be used to prove or disprove much of anything about anyone's ancestory) his mind is made up! He enjoys junk science so much he reads Al Gore's book, Inconvienent Truth and has a testimony of "truths" of that book!

As a Latter Day Saint, I have to say that this article is embarrasing.

Otis Spurlock | 12:45 p.m. Dec. 5, 2008 wrote:

"I don't see how you can say that Spencer W. Kimball was speculating:

"About twenty-five centuries ago, a hardy group left the comforts of a great city, crossed a desert, braved an ocean, and came to the shores of this, their promised land. There were two large families, those of Lehi and Ishmael, who in not many centuries numbered hundreds of millions of people on these two American continents."

- Prophet Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 601"

With those hundreds of millions of Nephites and Lamanites, I think it is fair to say that Spencer W. Kimball was probably not a proponent of the Limited Geography Theory that FARMS has been embracing.

The Americas have been continuously populated for 15,000 +- years; I believe that scientists are agreed on that fact which clearly shoots down other Mormon teachings, or have these teachings now bitten the proverbial dust as so many others have? Don't you believe that Adam and Eve were the our first parents and lived around 4000 BC? According to D&C 77:6 the earth is about 6000 years old. I had a time-line card when I was a seminary teacher and the Flood destroyed all but 8 people about 3000 BC.
Joseph Smith once claimed that the B of M peoples were in SOUTH America. When did Meso America become the place that apologists agreed upon? Or have they not agreed.
You are right about faith being an essential ingredient here; piles of it!

Time for MARVIN to REPENT. It's evil to be a judgmental stone thrower.

I truly find DNA interesting and the research as well.

When Galileo stood before the Inquisition, the religious hypocrites told him they KNEW (beyond a shadow of doubt) his heliocentric universe theory was false! They KNEW because of the word of God and because of the "revelation" they had received.

Galileo brought in his telescope and said, "Look."

They locked him up and destroyed his telescope.

DNA science is the scope by which we can look into human history. In the same way as the religious power-brokers of the medieval Inquisition, Peterson and his religious hypocrite buddies spend all their time trying to destroy the telescopes and tools of the scientists. Fools. But who can blame them. They have their livelihoods from propogating the fables and stories. The make their livings by these lies.

Science is liberating. Only those insecure with the freedom of science will not fight truth and will "look." But that requires a person to humble themselves by admitting that they really ARE NOT the "chosen" people of god, and they really ARE NOT morally superior to everyone else by being in god's "one and only true and living" club.

Science told us we are not the center of the universe. Mormons still think they are.

Dan, do you remember me? I was your roommate at DT the semester after you came home from your mission (and the year before I left on mine), and I attended your wedding reception. I thought you were going to become a linguist....

CJM