Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy Coug
Just for clarification, if there is a discussion about Lamanites being the principal ancestors of the American Indian and I post a link showing that mitochondrial DNA studies show how poorly mitochondrial DNA performed in Iceland trying to link known ancestors as little as 150 years back, does that amount to a defensive argument or an academic technique or something else?
|
The Icelandic study is a legitimate study, and citation to it is fine. I agree with your conclusions that the conclusions of the geneticists that no genetic links between the Middle East ancestry and Native Americans is overstated. Currently, no comprehensive studies have been conducted which would allow one to make that statement. The Cohen type mitochondrial studies are interesting in that the lack of findings is not insignificant, just not conclusive and may suggest a reason to reject Pratt's hypothesis of a hemispheric application of BoM.
There is a fine line, I suppose. Argument with exegesis and studies is certain apologia, but where the line is crossed can only be determined on a case by case basis. Just police yourself. If you want pure argument with academic allowance for oneself to be wrong or without surveying alternative interpretations, you're probably in the field of apologia.