Book of Mormon and DNA Studies (LDS.org)
“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints affirms that the Book of Mormon is a volume of sacred scripture comparable to the Bible. It contains a record of God’s dealings with three groups of people who migrated from the Near East or West Asia to the Americas hundreds of years before the arrival of Europeans.1
Although the primary purpose of the Book of Mormon is more spiritual than historical, some people have wondered whether the migrations it describes are compatible with scientific studies of ancient America. The discussion has centered on the field of population genetics and developments in DNA science. Some have contended that the migrations mentioned in the Book of Mormon did not occur because the majority of DNA identified to date in modern native peoples most closely resembles that of eastern Asian populations.2
Basic principles of population genetics suggest the need for a more careful approach to the data. The conclusions of genetics, like those of any science, are tentative, and much work remains to be done to fully understand the origins of the native populations of the Americas. Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples, and even if their genetic profile were known, there are sound scientific reasons that it might remain undetected. For these same reasons, arguments that some defenders of the Book of Mormon make based on DNA studies are also speculative. In short, DNA studies cannot be used decisively to either affirm or reject the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon.”Book of Mormon and DNA Studies. The Church acknowledges the contribution of scholars to the scientific content presented in this article; their work is used with permission. found here: (Bold Added)
Rediscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant through DNA
by Rod Meldrum
This work is the sum of over four years of nearly continuous research into possible DNA connections between the Native American peoples, and the prophesied “remnant” of the house of Israel as contained in the Book of Mormon. You will find scriptural, historical and scientific material combined in a synergistic way that may offer support to some of the physical claims of the Book of Mormon. Many tens of thousands of Latter‐day Saints have now seen portions of this information, either through a four hour DVD or at live presentations around the country. Many scholars and historians support this research and its findings, with many more anticipated as this information continues to gain momentum and change “accepted” paradigms. It is also acknowledged that there are many scholars that do not support this research.
It is a rather technical book because it addresses a subject with a high level of scientific contribution. A substantial number of direct quotes from peer reviewed scientific journals are incorporated and an attempt has been made to explain them to well‐educated non‐scientists. It is written in a way that maintains scientific accuracy but is readable and understandable.
The subject of DNA and the Book of Mormon, while a currently popular topic, is still rather poorly understood among Latter‐day Saints and non‐members alike. It is hoped that this exciting new information leads to insights that provide support for the historic reality of the Book of Mormon. Certain portions of this research may be considered by some to be of a controversial nature. In the author’s view this work is not controversial, but rather scriptural, historical and scientific. The desire is to present this new research in a non‐confrontational, Christ‐like manner, while offering significant evidence that may challenge some long held, yet unsanctioned, beliefs about the geography of the Book of Mormon.
While the information must address questions and possible objections to this research, the intent is to do so in a Christ‐like, respectful manner, yet as authoritatively and factually as possible. This information will be a powerful tool in helping to establish a new paradigm in the LDS community regarding the geography of the Book of Mormon.
Though the author’s professional research activities have not been specifically focused in the area of genetics, this paper does not rely on an appeal to personal authority, but provides detailed documentation in peer reviewed scientific journals that readers can examine for themselves.
The quotes and scriptures in this article are sometimes rather lengthy. This was done so that the reader could understand the quote in context without overstepping the boundaries of copyright. The majority of the journal articles are in journals that are difficult or expensive for normal readers to access, making it difficult to verify the quotes for most people. I encourage readers to check up and verify the validity of the quotes and if there is something found to have been taken out of context, it will be taken under advisement and corrections made as needed. Note: Unless otherwise indicated, emphasis within any quotation is added by the author.” Rediscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant through DNA by Rod Meldrum Preface
The Initial Genetics Controversy over DNA and the Book of Mormon
“What genetic evidence for the Book of Mormon would be expected and what was initially found? From the early days of the Church there have been many ideas and assumptions that prevailed upon its membership. Some believed that Book of Mormon peoples migrated into a pristine land devoid of any other populations and many thought that every Native American anywhere in the Americas was a literal descendant of one of the Book of Mormon groups, in other words, from the Lamanites.
An understanding of the lineages from Noah’s sons down through Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim then becomes critical to our understanding of what types of genetic markers might be expected from the Book of Mormon account.
The following sequential study of events leading up to one of the most exciting discoveries of human genetics regarding the Book of Mormon is about to be unfolded to your view, and the results are nothing short of amazing. The field of genetics is in a state of flux as they go about interpreting the current DNA data and continue to gain additional insights from larger sampling groups. One of the most exciting things for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‐day Saints is that these findings may provide additional validation for the historical claims of the Book of Mormon. They also could lend supporting evidence in favor of Joseph Smith’s under‐standing and revelations about the geography that is outlined within the prophecies and promises of the Book of Mormon.
Researchers working with Native American mtDNA among populations in North America found a new genetic strain that didn’t match any of the established Asiatic lineages, so it was relegated to the “other” category until further sampling could be done. As early as 1998 these new findings were beginning to surface in the literature. Genetic research in Europe was by this time in full stride and journals were flowing with information on their findings. Scientific investigators were beginning to unravel some of the mysteries behind the migrations of the ancient peoples of Europe. Populations were being sampled and linkages and groupings of European peoples were being procured from the data. Investigators on both sides of the Atlantic began to share their findings with each other in unprecedented cooperation, and unexpected links from the old world to the new world began to be forged.
The predominant theory of the peopling of the Americas, known as the Bering Strait theory or hypothesis, claimed that ancient Asian people crossed a “land bridge” sometime during the last ice age and crossed over into what is now Alaska. They then worked their way down through Canada into the United States, Mexico, Central America and finally pushed into South America. This theory predicted no European lineages until more recent admixture with Vikings and other European incursions into the Americas. This, however, was about to change!
The LDS Scholarly Response to the DNA Controversy
As introduced earlier, the initial lack of “European” DNA caused some to conclude that no ancient European or “Israelite” migration as recorded in the Book of Mormon had occurred anywhere in the Americas. This led a small number of LDS and non‐LDS scholars to write articles and books claiming that DNA studies refute the historicity of the Book of Mormon The LDS scholarly community was quick to respond with articles and papers debunking the uninformed false claims that DNA evidence “proves” the Book of Mormon false. Organizations such as FARMS, or Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies were among the first to counter these arguments. A series of highly informative and well‐researched articles appeared that dispelled the claims brought forward by the critics of the Church.
It became clear that the claims of those who had attempted to use DNA against the Book of Mormon were based on several untenable assumptions. LDS scholars demonstrated that using the current understanding of genetics and DNA research, a claim that portends to “prove” the Book of Mormon false had fundamental flaws. Their contributions to the understanding of DNA research for the membership of the Church are unquestionable and undeniable. Through these articles it became clear that DNA research could not dis‐prove the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.
The DNA controversy relating to Latter‐day Saint members stems from several assumptions made by members of the Church, LDS scholars, and those who are boldly claiming that DNA “proves” the Book of Mormon false. Those seeking to put forth evidence against the Church used many of these assumptions to form the basis of their arguments. This is why addressing these assumptions is important to an understanding of the nature of the controversy.
The Arguments of the Critics Based on the Assumptions of Church Members
One of the first assumptions made by critics who believed that DNA disproves the Book of Mormon is that it is the belief of the Church that all Native American populations, anywhere in North or South America, were descended from the Lamanites who were the remaining population after the final battles of extermination described in the Book of Mormon. While this belief has been pervasive among church members, the Church has had no official position … until recently.
Are all Native Americans “Lamanites”?
Although it has been widely held by some early and modern members of the Church that all indigenous peoples of the Americas descended from the original “Lamanite” population, the first presidency of the Church has recently made a change to the introduction page of the Book of Mormon that corrects that false assumption. A more detailed work by this author on the beliefs and understandings of some of the early brethren regarding this assumption has been compiled and reviewed by competent historians and will be released upon completion.
Historical accounts witness to the fact that some of these early brethren espoused a hemispheric model that embraced all of North and South America as the scope of the Book of Mormon lands. Such has also been the opinion of many modern apostles and prophets; however clarification was received by the First Presidency of the Church under the prophet Gordon B. Hinckley and reported in the Deseret Morning News on November 8, 2007. An article titled “Debate renewed with change in Book of Mormon introduction” by religion writer Carrie A. Moore (Here) appeared in the newspaper outlining a one‐word change to be made to the introduction page of all future printings of the Book of Mormon. The introduction was not a part of the original book as translated by Joseph Smith Jr., but was written by Bruce R. McConkie in 1981.
The original introduction page reads:
“After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians. Book of Mormon” – Preface Introduction: 1
Following the revision by the First Presidency, the Preface Introduction now reads:
“After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.” Book of Mormon – Preface Introduction: 2
The phrase “the principle ancestors” was officially corrected by the presidency of the Church to read “among the ancestors” of present day American Indians, which clarifies the position of the brethren and answers the question of whether all Native Americans are descendants of the Lamanites. Clearly they are not.
The incorrect assumption that all Native Americans descended from the “remnant” Lamanite population has also been challenged based on population demographics and geographical indications from the text.” Rediscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant through DNA by Rod Meldrum Page 15-17
Establishing What We May be Looking for Genetically through DNA Research
Before potential evidence can be found, an understanding of what might be expected must first be reached. If there were genetic indications from DNA studies supporting the Book of Mormon, what would they be? How would we know what they were, if we were to find them? What kind of DNA evidence would be necessary to demonstrate a plausible or possible connection between the claims of the Book of Mormon and DNA research? We must begin by stating what we might expect to find, defined as accurately as possible, based on the best information we have available.
Joseph Smith declared that the “the Indians” were literal [genetic] descendants from Shem’s priestly lineage. Upon the occasion of a visit of an angel to him he writes: He [the angel] told me of a sacred record which was written on plates of gold. I saw in the vision the place where they were deposited. He [the angel] said the Indians were the literal descendants of Abraham. Ref 23
This claim by Joseph was made in 1835. Joseph consistently referred to the Native Americans in the North American areas wherein he was acquainted as “Indians” or “Lamanites,” even interchangeably. He wrote that he received in vision knowledge of the location where the plates were deposited, then immediately relates that visionary location in New York with the Indians with which he would have been acquainted, making no distinction otherwise.
When understood in the light of his other revelatory statements from the Wentworth Letter and American Revivalist accounts, it is hard to imagine that Joseph thought the Indians he was referring to were not those of North America. He emphatically stated that “the remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country” and “the Book of Mormon is a record of the forefathers of our western tribes of Indians” and “by it, we learn that our western tribes of Indians, are descendants from that Joseph that was sold into Egypt…”
Had the Prophet thought his use of the term “Indians” meant the descendants of the Mayan culture in Mesoamerica, it seems odd that he would not have distinguished them from the Indians with whom he was intimately familiar. If the North American Indians were in fact not the descendants of which he spoke, wouldn’t Joseph have indicated so, directing his words to Central American peoples rather than simply stating “Indians that now inhabit this country,” clearly indicating those with whom he had familiarity? Remember that he testified that he had learned these things by an angel of God. He was not stating his opinion. Joseph knew.
If the Native American people that Joseph was acquainted with were in fact the very descendants of Book of Mormon people, it would seem that this would be a good place to begin looking for possible genetic connections. We should be keeping a sharp eye out for any genetic evidence within the North American Indian populations that could lend support to Joseph’s revelatory and prophetic statements. Of course we should also be looking for any genetic evidence anywhere in the Americas as well.” Rediscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant through DNA by Rod Meldrum Page 61
Reviewing the Case for DNA Evidence: Possible, Plausible, or Probable—Did the Following Expectations Occur?
What might reasonably be expected from the DNA evidence available today to demonstrate the possibility, plausibility or probability of the historicity of the Book of Mormon and what was found?
1. We expected DNA markers in Native American populations consistent with known Caucasian lineages stemming from Shem. They have been verified.
2. We expected DNA profiles that were predominantly Asian, with lower frequencies of European markers among a large sampling. This is what has been verified.
3. We expected DNA markers in Native Americans common to or consistent with those found among known Jewish or Israelite lineages. This has been verified.
4. We expected Native American markers consistent with specific lineages such as Semitic (good), Israelite (better), or Jewish (best) lineages. All three have been verified.
5. We expected these lineages to be shown to have existed in the Americas anciently, within the time‐frames of the Book of Mormon. This has been verified.
6. We expected lineages that existed near the time that Lehi left Jerusalem to possibly share lineages with Lehi’s group. This has been shown.
7. We hoped to find DNA markers linking Native American populations to populations from the same time frame and area from which Lehi’s group left. Again, this has been shown.
As a result of all of these expectations having been fulfilled, all of these refinements make a progressively stronger case with a more robust claim that the Book of Mormon story may actually be probable.
Conclusions
To further develop the case for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, some guidelines need to be established in analyzing old and new information regarding the Book of Mormon. These criteria, it is believed, will provide further strength to the case for the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, while most likely never “proving” it. There will always remain unanswered questions for which faith is required. No level of evidence should ever take the place or supplant the role of faith in individual testimonies of the truths of the gospel.
It is the hope of this author that the information contained herein will renew excitement in exploring the truths of the Book of Mormon, both physical and spiritual. It is the most believable and credible book, which has time and again held up under intense scrutiny. It is a historical record of real individuals who lived out their lives somewhere in the Americas. Where it happened is much less important than the fact that it happened.
The Importance of the Historicity of the Book of Mormon
The historical reality of the Book of Mormon forms the very basis for its teachings. The importance of this understanding is critical. It cannot be overstated. Robert L. Millet, professor of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University, made the following statement on the importance of the historicity of the Book of Mormon.
The historicity of the Book of Mormon record is crucial. We cannot exercise faith in that which is untrue, nor can “doctrinal fiction” have normative value in our lives. Ref 2
Faith, by definition is a belief in something that is true (Alma 32:21). That definition does not include fables or fairy tales. The Book of Mormon must be a true history in order for it to be true. There are those that believe that the book was simply an inspired story spun by the prophet Joseph Smith to teach spiritual truths. This is not consistent with the words of the book itself, the Lord, or his prophets. In order for the Book of Mormon to be spiritually true, it must also be historically true. Not perfectly historically accurate, since it was written by inspired men with human frailties, but true to the important aspects of the history. Millet goes on to clarify why its historicity is important.
Only scripture—writings and events and descriptions from real people at a real point in time, people who were moved upon and directed by divine powers—can serve as a revelatory channel, enabling us to hear and feel the word of God. Ref 2
A New Set of Criterion for Book of Mormon Research
A new set of criterion for Book of Mormon geographical research is proposed. These criteria follow a natural progression based on the newly released book “Prophecies and Promises” by Bruce Porter and this author. It is proposed that all old and new proposed geographies for the Book of Mormon meet the following criteria or explain why doing so is not necessary. The proposed model:
1. Must not violate the 36 Prophecies and Promises as outlined in the book by that title
2. Must not violate Joseph Smith’s revealed and historically documented words
3. Must be in the Promised Land of the United States of America as demonstrated scripturally in the book Prophecies and Promises
4. Must have at least a possible case for the remnant of the House of Israel to actually exist
5. Must demonstrate an advanced civilization within the Book of Mormon time frames
6. Must demonstrate that this civilization had at least some of the artifacts mentioned in the Book of Mormon (such as headplates, breastplates, pearls, metals, etc.)
7. Must demonstrate a civilization that had metalworking capabilities
8. Must have minable metal ore (copper, iron, gold) within its geography
9. Must have archaeologically verified cities built as described by Moroni with earth banks and trenches
10. Must demonstrate a basis for both an agrarian and nomadic hunting lifestyle within the proposed geography
11. Must demonstrate mass burials with evidence for wars of extermination
12. Travel distances must match known time frames from the Book of Mormon
13. Must have a plausible explanation for the destruction at the time of Christ
14. Must demonstrate road construction by the proposed civilization
15. Must demonstrate that the civilization deforested their lands
16. Must demonstrate that the civilization had capability of making cement
17. Must be able to be provide general correlations with the 550 geographic passages based on these new guidelines and with an understanding that they are, in fact, incomplete
Final Remarks
DNA expert David A. McClellan summarized his feelings. At the end of his article on detecting Lehi’s genetic signature, he writes: I am convinced that there has been constant gene flow between Asia and the Americas, but I am also convinced that there has been a trickle of migrants from other source populations. Though far from verifying or proving the Book of Mormon, this observation allows for the plausibility of the Book of Mormon story line. It is very possible that a group or groups of people from the Middle East found their way to the New World in 600 B.C. Ref 14
Like McClellan, it is agreed that while current DNA research is far from “proving” the truth of the Book of Mormon, certainly it may offer plausible evidence in favor of its claimed historicity. Based on this new DNA research, and utilizing the haplogroup X DNA lineage, there is now not only plausible evidence favoring the claims of the Book of Mormon, but there is credible evidence that “probably” supports it.
It could very well be that haplogroup X is indeed related to a migration from the Mediterranean area in the time frames of the Book of Mormon once more empirical rates of mtDNA mutations are used. For anyone to claim that haplogroup X cannot be related to the Book of Mormon, they must first demonstrate the following:
-That the rate of mutation upon which their claim is based is factual, meaning based on solid observational evidence, and not on theoretical musings.
-That haplogroup X is found in exclusivity within source populations that founded the other four founding haplogroups of the Americas and cannot be attributed to any other source.
-That this source population was the actual origin for all Native American haplogroup X lineages found in the Americas
-That Native American haplogroup X is not at all related to Mediterranean haplogroup X lineages
-That the time of arrival into the Americas of haplogroup X is inconsistent with the timing of the Book of Mormon migrations
Does this DNA research and evidence “prove” the Book of Mormon is true? Emphatically NO. We still do not have a sample population from which to gain a solid basis of comparison, we don’t know if anyone in Lehi’s group had haplogroup X DNA in any frequency, we can’t be positive that even if they originally had haplogroup X that it would have remained in sufficient quantity to reverse the effects of dilution or genetic bottlenecks. For that matter, we can’t know for certain even if haplogroup X is the only marker that can be a distinguishing characteristic of ancestry deriving from ancient Mediterranean groups.
However, this fresh new research and its resulting Heartland Model geography for the Book of Mormon does provide at least the possibility that an ancient migration to America from a population in the Mediterranean area did occur, which is consistent with the historical account from the Book of Mormon. At the minimum we now have DNA evidence that may very well support the claims of the Book of Mormon in a positive way, rather than accepting the neutral approach that there is not now, and never will be supporting or contradictory evidence (positive or negative) for this sacred record. Do we have faith that the Book of Mormon is a true historical account or not?
The author invites those who would like to further this theory to do so, as well as inviting all who find discrepancies to make them known so that they can be corrected. The author acknowledges that as with all scholarly work, mistakes can and will be made, and invites those who choose to take issue with this research to do so in a Christ‐like manner, rather than making personal attacks against the author’s character, knowledge or motives.
The Heartland Model is consistent with the previously established location of the Promised Land as being the United States of America, and Joseph Smith’s revelatory statements as outlined in the book Prophecies and Promises. Rediscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant through DNA by Rod Meldrum Page 161-163
For the FREE download of the entire 170 page report click here:
Druze
The greatest frequency of haplogroup X is observed in the Druze, a minority population in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, as much in X1 (16%) as in X2 (11%).[10] The Druze also have much diversity of X lineages. This pattern of heterogeneous parental origins is consistent with Druze oral tradition. The Galilee Druze represent a population isolate, so their combination of a high frequency and diversity of X signifies a phylogenetic refugium, providing a sample snapshot of the genetic landscape of the Near East prior to the modern age.[11]
North America
Further information: Genetic history of indigenous peoples of the Americas Haplogroup X is also one of the five haplogroups found in the indigenous peoples of the Americas. (namely, X2a subclade).
Although it occurs only at a frequency of about 3% for the total current indigenous population of the Americas, it is a bigger haplogroup in northern North America, where among the Algonquian peoples it comprises up to 25% of mtDNA types. It is also present in lesser percentages to the west and south of this area—among the Sioux (15%), the Nuu-chah-nulth (11%–13%), the Navajo (7%), and the Yakama (5%).
Unlike the four main Native American mtDNA haplogroups (A, B, C, D), X is not strongly associated with East Asia. The main occurrence of X in Asia discovered so far is in the Altai people in Siberia.[16]
One theory of how the X Haplogroup ended up in North America is that the people carrying it migrated from central Asia along with the A, B, C, and D Haplogroups, from an ancestor from the Altai Region of Central Asia.Two sequences of haplogroup X2 were sampled further east of Altai among the Evenks of Central Siberia.[10] These two sequences belong to X2* and X2b. It is uncertain if they represent a remnant of the migration of X2 through Siberia or a more recent input.
This relative absence of haplogroup X2 in Asia is one of the major factors used to support the Solutrean hypothesis. However, the New World haplogroup X2a is as different from any of the Old World X2b, X2c, X2d, X2e, and X2f lineages as they are from each other, indicating an early origin “likely at the very beginning of their expansion and spread from the Near East”.
The Solutrean hypothesis postulates that haplogroup X reached North America with a wave of European migration about 20,000 BP by the Solutreans, a stone-age culture in south-western France and in Spain, by boat around the southern edge of the Arctic ice pack.
In a 2008 article in the American Journal of Human Genetics, a group of researchers in Brazil (except for David Glenn Smith, of U.C. Davis) argue against the Solutrean hypothesis, stating:
“Our results strongly support the hypothesis that haplogroup X, together with the other four main mtDNA haplogroups, was part of the gene pool of a single Native American founding population; therefore they do not support models that propose haplogroup-independent migrations, such as the migration from Europe posed by the Solutrean hypothesis … Here we show, by using 86 complete mitochondrial genomes, that all Native American haplogroups, including haplogroup X, were part of a single founding population, thereby refuting multiple-migration models.”
An abstract in a 2012 issue of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology states that: “The similarities in ages and geographical distributions for C4c and the previously analyzed X2a lineage provide support to the scenario of a dual origin for Paleo-Indians. Taking into account that C4c is deeply rooted in the Asian portion of the mtDNA phylogeny and is indubitably of Asian origin, the finding that C4c and X2a are characterized by parallel genetic histories definitively dismisses the controversial hypothesis of an Atlantic glacial entry route into North America.”
A 2015 report re-evaluates the evidence. Saying that without conflicting evidence the most convincing explanation of migration is the “Beringian model”, they wrote that
“X2a has not been found anywhere in Eurasia, and phylogeography gives us no compelling reason to think it is more likely to come from Europe than from Siberia. Furthermore, analysis of the complete genome of Kennewick Man, who belongs to the most basal lineage of X2a yet identified, gives no indication of recent European ancestry and moves the location of the deepest branch of X2a to the West Coast, consistent with X2a belonging to the same ancestral population as the other founder mitochondrial haplogroups. Nor have any high-resolution studies of genome-wide data from Native American populations yielded any evidence of Pleistocene European ancestry or trans-Atlantic gene flow.” Wikipedia/Haplogroup X (mtDNA)
Lost Civilizations documentary, Deborah Bolnick on haplogroup X DNA
Supporting DNA Articles
“Great Surprise”—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins by National Geographic
“Nearly one-third of Native American genes come from west Eurasian people linked to the Middle East and Europe, rather than entirely from East Asians as previously thought, according to a newly sequenced genome.”
Americas’ Natives Have European Roots
The oldest known genome of a modern human solves long-standing puzzles about the New World’s genetic heritage.
“This new origin story helps to resolve several peculiarities in New World archeology. For example, ancient skulls found in both North and South America have features that do not resemble those of East Asians. They also carry the mitochondrial haplogroup X, which is related to western Eurasian lineages but not to east Asian ones.
On the basis of these features, some scientists have suggested that Native Americans descended from Europeans who sailed west across the Atlantic. However, says Willerslev, “you don’t need a hypothesis that extreme”. These features make sense when you consider that Native Americans have some western Eurasian roots.” By Ed Yong, Nature magazine on November 20, 2013
DNA Consultants Cherokee Study
“In 2008 DNA Consultants, Inc. initiated comprehensive DNA testing of the Cherokees living on the Qualla Reservation in western North Carolina. The North Carolina Cherokees were chosen because after 180 years in the west, Oklahoma Cherokees are so thoroughly mixed with other ethnic groups, that any DNA test marker obtained would be meaningless.
The laboratory immediately stumbled into a scientific hornet’s nest when the results were issued on a press release in April 2010. 2 That Cherokee princess in someone’s genealogy was most likely a Middle Eastern or North African princess. Its scientists have labeled the Cherokees not as Native Americans, but as a Middle Eastern-North African population. The implication is that they are indeed, the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. DNA Consultants, has now tested a much larger population on the North Carolina Reservation and gotten similar results. The Cherokees seem to be the people that Brent Kennedy thought the Melungeons were.
The Cherokees tested had high levels of DNA test markers associated with the Berbers, native Egyptians, Turks, Lebanese, Hebrews and Mesopotamians. Genetically, they are more Jewish than the typical American Jew of European ancestry. So-called “full-blooded” Cherokees had high levels of European DNA and a trace of Asiatic (Native American) DNA. 80 Some “card-carrying” Cherokees had almost no Asiatic DNA. The European DNA contained a much higher level of DNA test markers associated with the Iberian Peninsula that was typical of Caucasian Americans. The level of haplogroup T in the Cherokee (26.9%) approximated the percentage for Egypt (25%), one of the only lands where T attains a major position among the various mitochondrial lineages. The lab claims that their skin color and facial features are primarily Semitic in origin, not Native American.” DNA Consultants
Ancestor of Native Americans in Asia was 30% “Western Eurasian”
So in essence, maybe there is a little bit of Native American in Europeans and a little bit of European in Native Americans that occurred in their deep ancestry, not in the past 500-1000 years.
The Very First Americans May Have Had European Roots
“From the complete nuclear genome of a Siberian boy who died 24,000 years ago—the oldest complete genome of a modern human sequenced to date. His DNA shows close ties to those of today’s Native Americans. Yet he apparently descended not from East Asians, but from people who had lived in Europe or western Asia. The finding suggests that about a third of the ancestry of today’s Native Americans can be traced to “western Eurasia,” with the other two-thirds coming from eastern Asia.” The Very First Americans May Have Had European Roots By Colin Schultz Smithsonian.com
NATIVE AMERICANS HAVE DEEP ANCESTRY IN EUROPE
“We’ve been saying it all along but it looks as though geneticists may be forced by new findings in ancient DNA to admit that early Siberian people and present-day Native Americans both have strong roots in Europe, only secondarily in Asia.” Shocking, Long Overdue Revision to American Indian Genetics By Donald N. Yates
mtDNA Haplogroup X: An Ancient Link between Europe/Western Asia and North America?
“On the basis of comprehensive RFLP analysis, it has been inferred that ∼97% of Native American mtDNAs belong to one of four major founding mtDNA lineages, designated haplogroups “A”–“D.” It has been proposed that a fifth mtDNA haplogroup (haplogroup X) represents a minor founding lineage in Native Americans. Unlike haplogroups A–D, haplogroup X is also found at low frequencies in modern European populations.” AJHG Volume 63, Issue 6, December 1998, Pages 1852-1861
Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X
“Haplogroup X is an exception to this pattern of limited geographical distribution. It is found, generally at low frequencies, in both West Eurasians (Richards et al. 2000) and some northern groups of Native Americans (Ward et al. 1991; Forster et al. 1996; Scozzari et al. 1997; Brown et al. 1998; Smith et al. 1999; Malhi et al. 2001), but, intriguingly, it is absent in modern north Siberian and East Asian populations (Brown et al. 1998; Starikovskaya et al. 1998; Schurr et al. 1999), which are genetically and geographically closest to those of Native Americans. Among Siberians, haplogroup X mtDNAs have only been detected in some Altaian populations of southwestern Siberia (Derenko et al. 2001).” Am J Hum Genet. 2003 Nov; 73(5): 1178–1190. Published online 2003 Oct 20. doi: 10.1086/379380
mtDNA haplogroup X: An ancient link between Europe/Western Asia and North America?
by Virginia Morell
for Egypt (25%), one of the only lands where T attains a major position among the various
mitochondrial lineages. In Egypt, T is three times what it is in Europe.“Haplogroup X, found throughout the Middle East, has been found in high frequency of Native American tribes throughout the Great Lakes regions. The only other place on earth where haplogroup X is found at an elevated level apart from other American Indian groups like the Ojibwe (Algonquian) is among the Druze in the Hills of Galilee in northern Israel and Lebanon. The work of Shlush et al., “The Druze: A Population Genetic Refugium of the Near East,” PLoS ONE 3(5): e2105 [2009], demonstrates that this region was in fact the center of the worldwide diffusion of haplogroup X.” (Donald N. Yates, Mitochondrial DNA Lineages in the Cherokee; Egyptian, Greek, Phoenician and Hebrew Origins of Cherokee?, DNA Consultants, Longmont CO, [August 31, 2009].) As quoted in Annotated book of Mormon by David Hocking and Rod Meldrum 20018 page 556
When the Winter Olympic games were held in Salt Lake City in 2002, President Gordon B. Hinckley was asked by a reporter if he had a comment about the lack of DNA evidence for the Book of Mormon. He simply responded that all the information wasn’t in yet. Eleven years later, in 2013, National Geographic Magazine published an article titled: “Great Surprise”—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins.” The article (Here) presents data on a genome found that is related to present-day western Eurasian populations and modern Native Americans, not from East Asia—historically a puzzling finding.
In the article, ancient DNA researcher Eske Willerslev, of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark. stated: “This [DNA] study changes this idea because it shows that a significant minority of Native American ancestry actually derives not from East Asia but from a people related to present-day western Eurasians.” Willerslev also said. “It’s approximately one-third of the genome, and that is a lot,” he added. “So in that regard I think it’s changing quite a bit of the history” – Published November 22, 2013. (DNA illustration: Messer Woland, A. Adenine; B. Thymine; C. Guanine; D. Cytosine; 1. Sugar, Phosphate, Backbone; 2. Base pair; 3. Nitrogeous base. As quoted in Annotated book of Mormon by David Hocking and Rod Meldrum 20018 page 557
In order to show fairness I quoted at the beginning of this article from the LDS.org website under Gospel Topics and I now want you to read what FairMormon has to say, who believe the Book of Mormon people are from Mesoamerica.
As our good friend Wayne May says, “We report, you Decide!”
What FairMormon has to say about Book of Mormon DNA
Their Quote “Although this point has been hit on quite a bit, I’d like to add a few points to the discussion of the X haplogroup as evidence for The Book of Mormon. I am not a geneticist, but Ugo Perego, a leading geneticist who has published on the X haplogroup, assisted with the article, and had the final say of it’s content. I’d also like to add that this is not meant to attack anyone, but to just present the facts.” The Book of Mormon and the X haplogroup….again April 29, 2010 by Tyler Livingston
D&C 19:26 And again, I command thee that thou shalt not covet thine own property, but impart it freely to the printing of the Book of Mormon, which contains the truth and the word of God—
27 Which is my word to the Gentile, that soon it may go to the Jew, of whom the Lamanites are a remnant, that they may believe the gospel, and look not for a Messiah to come who has already come.
“The Solutrean hypothesis for the origin of the Clovis archaeological culture contends that people came from south-western Europe to North America during the Last Glacial Maximum. This hypothesis has received numerous critiques, but little objective testing, either of cultural or genetic evidence. We contest the assertion that there is NO genetic evidence to support this hypothesis, and detail the published evidence, consistent with a pre-Columbian western Eurasian origin for some founding genetic markers, specifically mtDNA X2a, and some autosomal influence, found in ancient and modern Native American populations. The possibility that the inferred pre-Columbian western autosomal influence came more directly than through Siberia is not even considered in such studies. The mtDNA X2a evidence is more consistent with the Atlantic route and dates suggested by the Solutrean hypothesis and is more parsimonious than the assumption of a single Beringian entry, that assumes retrograde extinction of X in East Eurasia. The mtDNA X2a evidence is more consistent with the Atlantic route and dates suggested by the Solutrean hypothesis and is more parsimonious than the assumption of a single Beringian entry, that assumes retrograde extinction of X in East Eurasia. (Oppenheimer, Steven, et. al., “Solutrean hypothesis: genetics, the mammoth in the room,” World Archaeology 46(5), October 2014.)”
The dating part of DNA will always be the problem for those who are against the theory of Native Americans with DNA from Israel, so long as they ignore the data in favor of their agenda-driven theories. It comes down to theory vs observation. Opponents WANT their theories to be accepted as fact, so they are emotionally tied to them to the point they can’t accept the observations.
