Dr. Simon Southerton, the former LDS bishop whose findings in molecular biology rocked the LDS Church when he released his groundbreaking book, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church says that there's additional new research that supports his premise.
LDS apologists argue that the 30 or so Jewish individuals whose progeny's history make up the bulk of the Book of Mormon is such a “drop in the bucket” so to speak, as to be negligible. But Southerton argues that a drop of ink in a bucket may dissipate but will not disappear when looked at molecularly.
I do not believe that any matter of faith is “settled” by scientific findings. However, Southerton's comments, found here in their entirety, are compelling.
For more information, see The Mormon Mirage 3rd Edition: A Former Member Looks at the Mormon Church Today(Zondervan, 2009). Also available as an audiobook and as an expanded-text E-book for Nook, Kindle and other reading devices.
Being a Christian author means being a proxy - for the benefit of another and…
View Comments
DOH!
Back to the drawing board . . . time to spin up some new speculative theories without evidence to back them up.
(while, of course, ignoring/diminishing/discounting the new discrediting evidence)
And, of course, anyone who wishes to can vote in my new Answerbag poll on these new findings:
"MORMONS: The most recent DNA research discredits the remaining LdS Apologist arguments. Now what?
Read more: MORMONS: The most recent DNA research discredits the remaining LdS Apologist arguments. Now what? | Answerbag http://www.answerbag.com/a_view/9202339#ixzz0r9FvE3LS
Southerton caters to people who know next to nothing about genetics (99.9% of people).
The things he extrapolates from the research very briefly cited in the link is astonishing. There is absolutely no basis found for his conclusions in the research. His work is so obviously biased in the desired outcome- this is the type of bogus "science" that causes people who know anything to doubt much of what they hear and read.
First of all- to my knowledge, Southerton has done no primary research involving the DNA of native Americans or those from MesoAmerica. He simply takes work that others have done, morphs it to make it look like it was designed to answer the questions about the Book of Mormon, and bases his ridiculous conclusions on assumptions so massive and far-reaching that it is impossible to take him seriously.
I have multiple degrees in molecular biology and have worked in genetics labs for years. I am seriously embarrassed for Dr. Southerton. It is hard not to believe his efforts in relation to the Book of Mormon stem from some desire to settle a score rather than any real search for truth.
I see you didn't end up publishing my comment. So much for any attempt at a balanced approach. I won't visit again.
I don't think you deserve a reply, but readers of this blog do.
First of all, you operated on the assumption that I was ignoring your comment. To the contrary, you posted it on July 1, right in the middle of my ten-day vacation, the last five days of which I had no computer Internet access. (True, I had my iPhone but none of the passwords to approve your comment.)
Secondly, anyone who posts as "anonymous" is suspect when they claim to have "multiple degrees i molecular biology." Do you? No way of knowing from your comments. Even if you do, why did you not give a single link to the kind of research you claim to be familiar with?
You may be all that you claim to be and have valid points to make. If you'd like to identify yourself, your degrees (which you brought up, not I) and give links to some opposing points of view, I'd be happy to post them.
Southerton is quoting a study, completely unrelated to the Book of Mormon, that looked at 24 people from the Maya and Pimas- TWENTY FOUR PEOPLE. What a joke.
His first assumption in all his extrapolating from the work of other people is that all native Americans are descendents of Lehi. While that assumption certainly helps him make the conclusions he does, it is in no way justified. (Even if that assumption is given, his conclusions are still not supported).
With that huge fundamentally flawed assumption upon which his "work" is based, he then extrapolates from a study of only 24 people. This is as bad as "science" gets.
His propaganda is "compelling" only to those who know nothing of the field which he is discussing (or of the scientific method).
These objections of mine are only the tip of the iceberg- he actually claims to be able to compare the DNA of a family in Jerusalem 2600 years ago with 24 people in the Americas today.
Do you understand that the "Jews" have undergone very many population expansions and implosions over that period of time, sometimes down to as many as 50,000 people. They have also intermarried with people of other lineages- today, over 50% of American Jews marry non-Jews.
These two phenomena working over 26 centuries makes it impossible to make any of the claims Southerton makes with current technology.
It is wonderful to be free and to believe what you want. But I recommend a little balance in what you read and a little caution in believing what you read.