The Book of Mormon and DNA Studies 

I'm grateful to Ugo and FAIR for providing well thought out information.

Hi Ugo. Nice to see you again! Ray Conger

Dr. Ugo Perego is a consummate scientist, and I'm grateful to have him. I hope the book coming will also address some of the newer concerns launched by disaffected scientists like Dr. Southerton. I realize Dr. Southerton is not a specialist in the same way Dr. Perego is on the subject of Native American population genetics, but it would be good if such professional differences were addressed somewhat. Having myself worked in both human-based and plant-based systems (the realms of Dr. Southerton and Dr. Perego respectively) there are substantial differences between the genetics and inheritance patterns of both, so I'm dubious about how much of the expertise transfers. The data, or rather lack-of-data that Dr. Perego highlights I think does a great job of explaining what we can and cannot expect from genetic research. More provocatively, during the question period, is the notion that perhaps there should be an effort to actively test this hypothesis regarding the Book of Mormon. We do have a little bit of data from the book that might be helpful. We have a linguistically (according to Jerry Grover) Sumerian people which were those we call the Jaredites, a Menassahite lineage from 600 BC, an Ephraimite lineage from 600 BC (presumed) and a Judahite lineage ~580 BC. Since the bulk of the northern Ephraimite and Menasshite lineages were assimilated into the Assyrian Empire around 700 BC, it might be better to compare genetic markers between people from the Balkans, Eastern Europe and Turkey to that of Indigenous peoples. I think gene-copy number analysis rather than just haplotype analysis might be required for this type of work. Either way, very interesting, but a little disappointing that there has been almost nothing new to talk about since Ugo gave his first presentation on this subject.

I can attest to the fact that DNA varies between siblings. And that DNA markers can quickly be diluted, or lost from a family line. My mother has done extensive geneology on her side, as well as her late husband's (my father's) side. Due to her research, but also due to first hand knowledge (she met and knew her parents, grandparents and great grandparents), she knew our family's lineage. She also met many from my Father's side, as well. She had French. English, and Hawaiian ancestry. In addition, my Father came from German and Irish ancestory. When my Mother, brother, sister and I had our DNA done (my Father had already passed away) we got some surprising results. The results for my Mother, sister, and I all showed that we had Pacific Islander (ie Hawaiian). My brother's did not. This ancestral line came through the maternal side.....Mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother. Perhaps my brother, receiving only one X chromosome from my Mother, did not inherit the marker for the Hawaiian side. My sister and I got a double dose of the Maternal Hawaiian side (two X chromosomes) and so it showed up on the DNA report. Another interesting thing is that only my brother's DNA showed Jewish ancestry. I believe it was carried through my Father's line through the Y chromosome, which my sister and I did not receive. So, the evidence of this lineage was "lost" to us. Another surprise was that all of us, my Mother, brother, sister and I showed a strong precentage of Scandinavian heritage. But we don't have anyone from Scandinavia in our family tree! The explanation that was given by the DNA report was that the Vikings had conquered a large portion of the lands that are now Europe. So if your ancestors came from Germany or England (as ours did), you will likely have some Viking (Scandinavian) DNA. With all the ancient migrations, we are probably more related than we think!

You did not mention at all DNA studies of the mitrocondia DNA from the bones of the hopewell people. Why?

Enjoyed watching this. It is interesting to see that you used the example of Thomas Jefferson because Fawn M. Brodie in her biography was an early adopter of the idea that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with his slaves. She also wrote one of the most complete historical records of Joseph Smith. Again, enjoyed this video!

.

So Kennewick Man is 8,000 years old. That's older than the garden of Eden in Jackson County Missouri and Adam and Eve. That's older than the flood and the tower of babel. And since the Book of Mormon mentions both the flood and the Tower of Babel, what does that say about the Book of Mormon? Kennewick man's descendants are Native Americans that still live in the Pacific Northwest according to DNA testing. And it's nice to have Rod Meldrum put in his place by a real scientist.