Continuing with the comments made by a Great Lakes theorist about the Lehi Colony traveling around Africa and across the Atlantic (see last post), he wrote:
“—cross the Atlantic at the shortest distance between the Old World and the New, with enough fresh water stored on board for the crossing. After crossing over to the western hemisphere, you sail along coastal waters and northward, near chains of islands; and then navigate North American waterways inland until you arrive within walking distance of a freshwater "west sea".”
At the shortest distance between the Old World and the New, is between Dakar, Senegal to Natal, Brazil, a distance of about 1600 miles. However, this has two flaws. First, it would be backtracking, since Senegal is further north than this bulge of Brazil (see map). And second, the winds and currents do not blow toward the west across from Africa to the Americas until you reach the Cape Verde Islands, a distance of about 4,550 miles—and this route would take a sailing ship “driven forth before the wind” the entire distance against the winds of the South Atlantic Gyre.
Once again, a person can look on a map today and say, “hey, this is a good route” without knowing anything about the winds and currents affecting sailing vessels in 600 B.C. Even into the Age of Discovery, the 16th-century, exploration was dependent upon winds and currents—twenty two hundred years after Lehi sailed.
It is unconscionable for scholars and theorists to make such claims when any amount of study and research will show that such a claim is absolutely and unequivocally impossible. But this author does not stop there. He goes on to say:
“After crossing over to the western hemisphere, you sail along coastal waters and northward, near chains of islands; and then navigate North American waterways inland until you arrive within walking distance of a freshwater "west sea".”
It would be interesting to see just what “waterways” he refers. To settle in the Great Lakes area, one can easily look on a map to see that such a distance is over 400 miles from any point to any Great Lake. And since one of the Great Lakes is considered the “West Sea” by these theorists, we are talking about a 400 mile plus trek to reach a spot on the “west sea south” for the place of “first inheritance.”
If the “West Sea” is Lake Erie, as so many Great Lakes theorists claim, then one would have to travel at least 380 miles overland from around New York harbor, or the harbor in Delaware, both of these areas would be the shortest distance. Anywhere else would be more than 400 miles and as much as 500 miles. It is interesting of this “overland” distance, of which this author claims “then navigate North American waterways inland until you arrive within walking distance of a freshwater "west sea.” The difficulty of this for such a claim is that there are no “inland waterways” leading to the Great Lakes. Certainly nothing a deep sea ocean vessel could negotiate.
Some theorists have claimed Lehi sailed down the St. Lawrence River from the Gulf of St. Lawrence—a distance up the coast of over 2000 miles, then a trip back down the river of about 800 miles—however, such was not possible because of the Rachine Rapids (see an earlier post) that blocked the river from through passage of any type of boat.
Others have claimed sailing up the Mississippi to the Ohio River, since the latter river ends in Pittsburg, only a short (not walking) distance to Lake Erie. However, even a meager due diligence research would show that the Mississippi River was not navigable as far as Memphis, and some reports show less than half that distance in antiquity because of the shallowness of the shoals in upper Mississippi state.
The point is, you cannot “navigate North American waterways inland until you arrive within walking distance of a freshwater "west sea” in 600 B.C., or until after much dredging, re-routing, and clearing waterways that took place during the 18th century could any inland waterway be navigated by a deep ocean sailing vessel.
Simply put, any arrival at Lake Erie, the theorists’ “West Sea” would have been an overland trek of some 400 miles or more—and cannot be assumed to have taken place when not a single word in the scriptural record suggests such. On the other hand, Jacob said “the Lord has made the sea our path, and we are upon an isle of the sea” (2 Nephi 10:21) which suggests a far different scenario that the Great Lakes.
(See the next post, “Wood Ship and West Sea Landing – Part VI,” for the final part of this paragraph describing the ridiculous voyage across the Atlantic and into the hinterland of North America)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment