Where have all the Lamanites gone?

[Indy Coug]

No, I'm pretty sure that Lehi didn't wander that far before sailing to the new world. You aren't trying to suggest that Lehi is Chinese are you?

What about the Jaredites?

[woot]

I thought this thread was going to be about why Native Americans and Polynesians are all of Asian descent. Were the Lamanites simply outbred, or was there another war post-Moroni in which they were exterminated?

Edit: Doh SU's on the case. Direct angst at him.

[Indy Coug]

I thought this thread was going to be about why Native Americans and Polynesians are all of Asian descent. Were the Lamanites simply outbred, or was there another war post-Moroni in which they were exterminated?

If there was already an existing population in the Americas of several million and a group of 20 to 40 arrived 2,600 years ago, how long would it take for their DNA markers to vanish?

[UtahDan]

If there was already an existing population in the Americas of several million and a group of 20 to 40 arrived 2,600 years ago, how long would it take for their DNA markers to vanish?

Good point! Maybe the people at the time of the confusion of the tongues were Chinese. BOJ could well have been Chinese.

[creekster]

Polynesian pre-historic ancestors come from the south coast of China. I don't believe this is debatable based on the linguistic evidence.

In official LDS publications, missionary materials, conference talks, and as strongly suggested or outright stated in the Book of Mormon introduction, Lamanite used to refer to all aboriginal peoples the New World, from the South Sea Islands to Greenland, from Prudoe Bay to Tierra Del Fuego. As usual, there is no coherant doctrine or direction on this. Modern revelation is sorely needed.

Personally, I don't know why the term couldn't just as well refer to Celts or Maltese.

Prior to a recent trip to Prague I spent some time reading about the history of the Czechs. In more than one book I read that the Czechs claim they are descended from a celtic tribe that wandered into Central Europe but that this is complete poppycock based on both the linguisitc and genetic evidence. Sure enough, Every Czech I met there with whom this topic came up asserted they were descended from Celts. When I told them what I had read and what the evidence showed, they scoffed. One guy was even incensed. I guess they need modern revelation, too.

[creekster]

If there was already an existing population in the Americas of several million and a group of 20 to 40 arrived 2,600 years ago, how long would it take for their DNA markers to vanish?

I noted that in the articel woot posted about neandertal ancestors yesterday one of the issues the author discussed was the lack of neandethal markers in afircan populations. He offered several explantions for this problem, including htat they are out there and they just hadnt tested the right population yet.

[Surfah]

Good point! Maybe the people at the time of the confusion of the tongues were Chinese. BOJ could well have been Chinese.

I am part Chinese. My last name is Chinese. Either way you want to slice it I am still a proud effing Lamanite.

[woot]

If there was already an existing population in the Americas of several million and a group of 20 to 40 arrived 2,600 years ago, how long would it take for their DNA markers to vanish?

Not long, but that's not how the BoM narrative goes. Still, you've made my point. The reason nobody should call modern native americans "Lamanites" is because they're not Lamanites.

[Surfah]

Not long, but that's not how the BoM narrative goes. Still, you've made my point. The reason nobody should call modern native americans "Lamanites" is because they're not Lamanites.

Not all that were called Lamanites were descendants of Laman.

[Indy Coug]

Not long, but that's not how the BoM narrative goes. Still, you've made my point. The reason nobody should call modern native americans "Lamanites" is because they're not Lamanites.

The Book of Mormon clearly states (maybe more than once) relatively early on that the term Nephite and Lamanite became a very broad, generic term referring to those who believed in Christ or who were or weren't friendly to those who believed in Christ. At that point, the genetic component became largely moot.

[woot]

I noted that in the articel woot posted about neandertal ancestors yesterday one of the issues the author discussed was the lack of neandethal markers in afircan populations. He offered several explantions for this problem, including htat they are out there and they just hadnt tested the right population yet.

And the reason they would look is because we know that there were various migrations back into Africa from Europe and the Middle East, which theoretically would have brought these neandertal genes back into Africa. It shouldn't be nearly as strong as in Europe, but we might be able to find it.

It's also necessary to point out that we're talking about a time period from about 80,000 to 40,000 years ago, and yet we can still see it. Yet we can't find any evidence of a group of Israelites from only 1600 years ago. Maybe they just had really terrible genes that were all selected out. There's the new Mormon narrative.

[woot]

The Book of Mormon clearly states (maybe more than once) relatively early on that the term Nephite and Lamanite became a very broad, generic term referring to those who believed in Christ or who were or weren't friendly to those who believed in Christ. At that point, the genetic component became largely moot.

So they interbred with all the Asians who were already present? That's cool. Strange the Asians have never been mentioned in GC or Sunday School.

[creekster]

And the reason they would look is because we know that there were various migrations back into Africa from Europe and the Middle East, which theoretically would have brought these neandertal genes back into Africa. It shouldn't be nearly as strong as in Europe, but we might be able to find it.

It's also necessary to point out that we're talking about a time period from about 80,000 to 40,000 years ago, and yet we can still see it. Yet we can't find any evidence of a group of Israelites from only 1600 years ago. Maybe they just had really terrible genes that were all selected out. There's the new Mormon narrative.

TIme is certainly an important factor, but so is proportion, as Indy points out. In fact, in the paper today they quoted an archeologist from Stanford who was quite skpetoical about the findings of the neadertal study as it wa sinconsistent with everythign in the archeological record. He was keeping an open mind, hwoever.

[Indy Coug]

So they interbred with all the Asians who were already present? That's cool. Strange the Asians have never been mentioned in GC or Sunday School.

Why would or should they?

[creekster]

So they interbred with all the Asians who were already present? That's cool. Strange the Asians have never been mentioned in GC or Sunday School.

Cute but silly. The BoM doesnt call them asians. and as INdy points out it DOES say it was a generic term appied to many, which preusmably includes the peopels here already.