Ancient Native Americans from Europe?

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by woot

I have no idea what you could possibly be talking about. You might as well say that physics is God and Newton is the prophet (Einstein as first counselor?). Are your beliefs so tenuous that you can't handle knowledge coming from sources other than Mormon leaders?

That's an attempt to dodge and deflect; to denegrate my beliefs, to turn the discussion from you onto me. If you cannot other wise contend with my ideas other other than to condescend, resist the urge to post.

My faith is not tenuous -yours, in science, is.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by woot

I have no idea what you could possibly be talking about. You might as well say that physics is God and Newton is the prophet (Einstein as first counselor?). Are your beliefs so tenuous that you can't handle knowledge coming from sources other than Mormon leaders?

I think this thread is a good case in point why it's folly to jettison the spiritual in favor of the physical when the two appear to be irreconcilably opposed. Our very incomplete understanding of the physical is not enough for some of us to dismiss the spiritual witness we've received.

Evidently you're more than comfortable in doing so.

[woot]

Originally Posted by tooblue

That's an attempt to dodge and deflect; to denegrate my beliefs, to turn the discussion from you onto me. If you cannot other wise contend with my ideas other other than to condescend, resist the urge to post.

My faith is not tenuous -yours, in science, is.

You presented a silly, subjective parody. How am I to "contend" with that?

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by tooblue

so Evolution is God and Darwin is the prophet of the restoration ... how would you like to pay for the registration of your religion -cash or credit?

Originally Posted by Archaea

Woot is to science what Tex and Aaron Shaf are to religion.

Whoa. Did I miss something?

[woot]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I think this thread is a good case in point why it's folly to jettison the spiritual in favor of the physical when the two appear to be irreconcilably opposed. Our very incomplete understanding of the physical is not enough for some of us to dismiss the spiritual witness we've received.

Evidently you're more than comfortable in doing so.

Indeed, I am. I'm not sure how this thread demonstrates your point. New evidence will be brought forth daily for as long as humanity continues. Is each instance of this supposed to remind me that science doesn't know everything? I needn't be reminded of something I deal with on a daily basis in my own work.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by woot

Indeed, I am. I'm not sure how this thread demonstrates your point. New evidence will be brought forth daily for as long as humanity continues. Is each instance of this supposed to remind me that science doesn't know everything? I needn't be reminded of something I deal with on a daily basis in my own work.

My point?

Anti-LDS stance: DNA evidence proves no Middle Eastern presence in ancient America. Therefore, the Book of Mormon is false.

New research: New DNA evidence shows that ancient America was populated from various corners of the earth besides Trans-Siberian settlers, including Europe.

So if you've made your bed with the Anti-LDS stance, you have to at least admit there are a few bed bugs that have crawled in and disturbed your slumber.

[woot]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

My point?

Anti-LDS stance: DNA evidence proves no Middle Eastern presence in ancient America. Therefore, the Book of Mormon is false.

New research: New DNA evidence shows that ancient America was populated from various corners of the earth, including Europe.

So if you've made your bed with the Anti-LDS stance, you have to at least admit there are a few bed bugs that have crawled in and disturbed your slumber.

Not in the slightest. Even if we found evidence that a small band of people crossed the ocean at about 600 BC in an improbable boat, it wouldn't back up any of the supernatural claims. I agree it would give me pause, though. That there is still not a shred of positive evidence in favor of this story should give you pause.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by woot

Not in the slightest. Even if we found evidence that a small band of people crossed the ocean at about 600 BC in an improbable boat, it wouldn't back up any of the supernatural claims. I agree it would give me pause, though. That there is still not a shred of positive evidence in favor of this story should give you pause.

http://www.colostate.edu/Dept/Entomo...000/wells.html

[woot]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

http://www.colostate.edu/Dept/Entomo...000/wells.html

I'll need an interpretation of how that applies to what we're talking about.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by woot

I'll need an interpretation of how that applies to what we're talking about.

Circumstantial evidence of Pre-Columbian American contact with Egypt as it relates to your comment about an "unlikely boat".