Ancient Native Americans from Europe?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Here's a link to a fairlds.org document on this subject:
http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php/B...d_DNA_evidence

Pretty good analysis. One-sided, but at least something balance out all the other opinions out there.

That's a good link not because it seeks to genetically tie the Native American population with the Middle East, but why the arguments against that possibility have many fundamental flaws.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

That's a good link not because it seeks to genetically tie the Native American population with the Middle East, but why the arguments against that possibility have many fundamental flaws.

Right. One of the more interesting points it makes that most overlook is that Lehi and family were NOT JEWS (i.e. tribe of Judah). With that in mind, I'm not sure how DNA evidence of any kind is at all relevant (either for or against).

[Requiem]

Although the article is interesting, am I correct assume you posted it as subtle evidence supporting the historicity of the Book of Mormon? The discovery of Clovis points "dating more than 12,000 years ago", and findings "suggesting separate migrations of different populations of modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) from Asia" are not directly linked to BOM civilizations.

If your point is simply that we are finding new evidence in regards to the timing and sources of North American civilization, then I agree. There are other interesting findings supporting theories that Europeans were in North America at least a century prior to Columbus. One of the most fascinating theories is embedded in stone carvings at the Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland. The Chapel contains carvings depicting cacti and sweet corn that are dated as of the late fourteenth century. These crops, indigenous to North America, are said to have been found on the fairly well documented 1398 voyage of Henry St. Clair to North America. St. Clair was accompanied on his voyage by members of the Knights Templar. I had the opportunity in September to visit Rosslyn Chapel and it is eerily fascinating.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Requiem

Although the article is interesting, am I correct assume you posted it as subtle evidence supporting the historicity of the Book of Mormon? The discovery of Clovis points "dating more than 12,000 years ago", and findings "suggesting separate migrations of different populations of modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) from Asia" are not directly linked to BOM civilizations.

If your point is simply that we are finding new evidence in regards to the timing and sources of North American civilization, then I agree. There are other interesting findings supporting theories that Europeans were in North America at least a century prior to Columbus. One of the most fascinating theories is embedded in stone carvings at the Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland. The Chapel contains carvings depicting cacti and sweet corn that are dated as of the late fourteenth century. These crops, indigenous to North America, are said to have been found on the fairly well documented 1398 voyage of Henry St. Clair to North America. St. Clair was accompanied on his voyage by members of the Knights Templar. I had the opportunity in September to visit Rosslyn Chapel and it is eerily fascinating.

The reason the article was posted has been stated several times. If you found the Rosslyn Chapel link to America fascinating, you should really read this book:

http://www.1421.tv/

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Requiem

Although the article is interesting, am I correct assume you posted it as subtle evidence supporting the historicity of the Book of Mormon? The discovery of Clovis points "dating more than 12,000 years ago", and findings "suggesting separate migrations of different populations of modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) from Asia" are not directly linked to BOM civilizations.

If your point is simply that we are finding new evidence in regards to the timing and sources of North American civilization, then I agree. There are other interesting findings supporting theories that Europeans were in North America at least a century prior to Columbus. One of the most fascinating theories is embedded in stone carvings at the Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland. The Chapel contains carvings depicting cacti and sweet corn that are dated as of the late fourteenth century. These crops, indigenous to North America, are said to have been found on the fairly well documented 1398 voyage of Henry St. Clair to North America. St. Clair was accompanied on his voyage by members of the Knights Templar. I had the opportunity in September to visit Rosslyn Chapel and it is eerily fascinating.

The original post is what it is. Contrary evidence to support the notion that the land bridge theory is not as air tight as is often espoused here in this forum.

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

The reason the article was posted has been stated several times. If you found the Rosslyn Chapel link to America fascinating, you should really read this book:

http://www.1421.tv/

Thanks - the site appears interesting and I will peruse it in greater detail when I have the time.

[woot]

Originally Posted by tooblue

The original post is what it is. Contrary evidence to support the notion that the land bridge theory is not as air tight as is often espoused here in this forum.

Well it does seem to be pretty "air-tight" as far as the evidence that a huge number of people did, in fact, cross it. This new evidence is exciting though. It's not my field, but I do know there is a gigantic contingent of scientists that are searching for pre-clovid civilization, and if they finally found evidence for it, then bully for them. I'll be interested to read their theories on how these Europeans might have gotten here.

[Indy Coug]

Here's another book I highly recommend which challenges the status quo on the accepted timeline of the origins of human civilization.

http://www.amazon.com/Fingerprints-G...2554899&sr=8-1


This book is not important because of the conclusions it draws, but rather for its linking of various oral traditions from around the world from ancient cultures which would appear to have no connection to each other, and the questions it asks regarding archaeological evidence that has long been interpreted one way, but not necessarily correctly.

If you come away from reading this book doing nothing more than mocking some of the conclusions the author arrives at, you've completely missed the point of this book.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by woot

Well it does seem to be pretty "air-tight" as far as the evidence that a huge number of people did, in fact, cross it. This new evidence is exciting though. It's not my field, but I do know there is a gigantic contingent of scientists that are searching for pre-clovid civilization, and if they finally found evidence for it, then bully for them. I'll be interested to read their theories on how these Europeans might have gotten here.

If it was so 'air-tight' why is there a "gigantic contingent of scientists" using the scientific method to evolve a malleable theory that is merely supposition and not fact

[woot]

Originally Posted by tooblue

If it was so 'air-tight' why is there a "gigantic contingent of scientist" using the scientific method to evolve a malleable theory that is merely supposition and not fact

Because why have only one air-tight theory when you can have two?

But seriously, knowing one method of migration doesn't eliminate the possibility of others.