Why The Book of Mormon couldn't have taken place in North America

[livy111us]

Originally Posted by DigitalShadow

I don't think that FAIR's criticism of Mr. Meldrum's work is innaccurate, but I do think that their level of scrutiny is inconsistent. I've never seen them scrutinize works that agree with scripture and popular LDS theories no matter how unfounded in actual science they are.

In any case, that's just my 2 cents.

I think they look at it as that A LOT of people are being duped by his theory that are not based on fact. Take for example DNA. If there were members who believed that the BOM happened in the Great Lakes region, that Joseph Smith taught it, It's revealed doctrine, Science supports it and so do our scriptures, and then began to research these things and found out that they don't support a North American setting at all, *may* have an effect on their faith. If they believe something to be true, and then it all falls out from under them, they themselves may fall away as well. So it was more of a pre-emptive essay, as opposed of answering false information as it comes out. That way it may prevent some testimony problems in the future.

But, there is no revealed doctrine on the subject and it may very well have happened in North America. FAIR supports no theory. In fact, there are members of FAIR who believe it happened in North America as well. But one thing that is agreed on is, Meldrums methods. They don't like to see people decieved, no matter what the issue.

[Daniel]

Originally Posted by DigitalShadow

I never said that FAIR is inaccurate, just inconsistent in what they scrutinize and to what level.

I misread your statement before I could correct and follow up you posted. My response to the inconsistancy part. http://www.lds.net/forums/253363-post20.htm

[Moksha]

Originally Posted by DigitalShadow

I never said that FAIR is inaccurate, just inconsistent in what they scrutinize and to what level.

Are you saying they never went after the Tapir Hypothesis the same way?

When you have a pet theory that you have speculated long and hard about, that seems to fit sans evidence, would you too not be inconsistent when another theory comes along and upsets your applecart?

[DigitalShadow]

Originally Posted by livy111us

I think they look at it as that A LOT of people are being duped by his theory that are not based on fact. Take for example DNA. If there were members who believed that the BOM happened in the Great Lakes region, that Joseph Smith taught it, It's revealed doctrine, Science supports it and so do our scriptures, and then began to research these things and found out that they don't support a North American setting at all, *may* have an effect on their faith. If they believe something to be true, and then it all falls out from under them, they themselves may fall away as well. So it was more of a pre-emptive essay, as opposed of answering false information as it comes out. That way it may prevent some testimony problems in the future.

But, there is no revealed doctrine on the subject and it may very well have happened in North America. FAIR supports no theory. In fact, there are members of FAIR who believe it happened in North America as well. But one thing that is agreed on is, Meldrums methods. They don't like to see people decieved, no matter what the issue.

Do you think that FAIR would have behaved exactly the same if Rod had used the same methods and made the same unfounded claims about DNA evidence suggesting the BoM happened in Central or South America?

[DigitalShadow]

Originally Posted by Moksha

Are you saying they never went after the Tapir Hypothesis the same way?

When you have a pet theory that you have speculated long and hard about, that seems to fit sans evidence, would you too not be inconsistent when another theory comes along and upsets your applecart?

I wouldn't have a long speculated about theory sans evidence

[DigitalShadow]

Originally Posted by Daniel

Personally I believe that they see a real danger with his work. That's the reason for the scrutiny. That by using his faulty data, and appeals to authority people are laying all their faith in what he says, instead of their faith in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. If there was a fall out, people testimonies are at stake. I'm sure Meldrum is a great guy and has real good intentions but honestly what he is doing can hurt a lot of people. Why do you think anti's are eating this up. They know where Meldrum succeeds they do also. You can find them wringing their hands on RFM, Signature Books, and other known sites hostile to the church. waiting for the fallout with arms wide open.

I have no problem with their scrutiny of Rod, I do however take issue with their lack of scrutiny on issues they agree with. IMHO being 'fair' would mean applying equal scrutiny to both sides.

[hordak]

Originally Posted by livy111us

FAIR has written a great review of Rodney Meldrums works/claims that The Book of Mormon happened in North America, and that DNA, archaeology, etc... support it. They show that he is wrong on most points. Very interesting:
Reviews of DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography

YouTube - Evidence of Mormonism? Pt1

He does a pretty good job linking the BoM to North America IMO. Even if you don't buy it he makes some good points about the "discrepancies" in the Book. Theres 4 parts.
Ironically i don't think he is a believer.

[Vort]

Originally Posted by DigitalShadow

Do you think that FAIR would have behaved exactly the same if Rod had used the same methods and made the same unfounded claims about DNA evidence suggesting the BoM happened in Central or South America?

Yes, of course -- if his presentations and insinuations had been similar, if he had been presenting and selling his ideas widely, and if FAIR had been getting queries about his presentations. To my eyes, it looks like FAIR has bent over backward to be impersonal and, well, fair in their criticisms of Brother Meldrum (never even mentioning, for example, that his name is an anagram for "led merry mound", let alone "dourly mend REM").

[LifeOnaPlate]

Originally Posted by prisonchaplain

Loudmouth...wow...I'm sorry, but it seems rather caddy and political for FAIR to insinuate that a fellow active church member has no defense and has proffered his research primarily for money. It's like saying, "We don't want to hit below the belt...so we'll just use "quotes" from our opponents to do so." I'm I reading this wrong?

Actually, Meldrum insinuates on his new blog that FAIR is only reviewing his work this way because of a profit motive, when FAIR is entirely owned and operated on a volunteer basis.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Originally Posted by DigitalShadow

Do you think that FAIR would have behaved exactly the same if Rod had used the same methods and made the same unfounded claims about DNA evidence suggesting the BoM happened in Central or South America?

If the claims were faulty? Absolutely. FAIR has many different takes on the subject among the different members and they have no problems engaging with each other. Meldrum's approach is dramatically un-scholarly. I made up that word for the occasion.