Have They Found Where Battles Were Fought Around Cumorah? – Part III “Obliterating Ancient Evidences”

Continuing from the previous post regarding the fallacy that ancient Nephite forts have been found in upstate New York along the Butternut Creek and the area of Onondaga.
    As for the author’s earlier comment: “The Great Lakes area of the United States is covered in ruins that match the cities and fortresses of “Cumorahland” described in the Book of Mormon. Unfortunately many of those ruins have been destroyed or covered over in the last 200 years,” there is nothing at all to suggest any battles, wars, forts, or other buildings or activities that pre-date the early French, European and American activities that obviously took place in these lands of which we have ample historical knowledge.

An ancient pyramid in the middle of downtown Lima, Peru, where the city sprawl has been built all around the ancient ruin. Many such sites exist in the Americas where modern development has not completely destroyed evidence of ancient civilizations

  
First of all, it is really disingenuous to claim that all evidence of the Jaredite Kingdom, Nephite Nation, and Jaredite kingdom was wiped out by modern man and his development when there are examples of major civilizations scattered all around the world. Even in the Americas, in four different countries of Andean Peru, despite considerable development, modern construction and large cities being built, there are still evidences of the Norte Chico, Moche, Nazca, Caral, Chavin, Tiwanaku and Wari to name a few in Peru; Valdivia, Las Vegas, Cotocollao, Machalilla, Cañaris, Quiucaras, Esmeraldas, Tungurahua and Chimborazo, to name a few in Ecuador; Clovis, Mapuche, Chancaense, Kaweshkar, Aymara, Tiwanaku, in Bolivia, etc. And the lists go on; however, very few ancient cultures have been determined in North America, and nothing of actual building sites other than mounds, particularly the Heartland and Eastern States, with different names tied to archaic mound builders from Mississippi to the Great Lakes, such as Woodland, Adena, Mississippian, including extended groups, such as the Coles Creek culture being a Late Woodland culture.

Top: The ancient Aztec structures in Tenochtitlan’s Templo Mayor in the midst of city sprawl around it in Mexico City; Bottom: Ancient ruins of a building dating back to 500 BC with a city of Sardana in Albania, built all around it

Surely, if the Jaredites, who spent 1500 years in the promised land, and the Nephites, Mulekites and Lamanites, who spent 1000 years in the Land of Promise, would have left something more than burial mounds scattered across the landscape. According to anthropologists, the area they call “the Northeast” stretched from present-dayhCanada’s Atlantic coast to north Carolina and inland to the Mississippi River valley. Its inhabitants were members of two main groups: Iroquoian speakers Iincluding the Cayuga, Oneida,Erie, Onondaga,Seneca and Tuscarora) most of whom lived along inland rivers and lakes in fortified, politically stable villages, and the more numerous Algonquian speakers (including Pequot, Fox, Shawnee, Wampanoag, Delaware and Menominee) who lived in small farming and fishing villages along the ocean. This region has been arbitrarily sub-divided a 3,400-year Clovis period into pre-Clovis, early Paleoindian, Middle Paleoindian and Late Paleoindian, which is based on examining “fluted hafted bifaces (projectile points created using bifacial percussion flaking on both faces) across North America,” all based on only distinct stone tools found at Clovis, New Mexico in the 1920s and 1930s.
    It should also be noted that the Clovis culture is said to have been replaced by several more localized regional societies from the so-called Younger Dryas (returning to glacial conditions from a warm climate) cold-climate period onward. Post-Clovis cultures include the Folsom tradition (projectiles found at Folsom, New Mexico), Gainey, Suwannee (Suwannee-Simpson), Plainview-Goshen (found near Plainville, Texas), Cumberland, and Redstone.

Various projectile points from the four periods mentioned above, and from these slight differences, 3,400 years are arbitrarily divided up by anthropologists and archaeologists to claim entirely different time periods and cultures. Note the last four, all from the Clovis period, yet totally different from four different parts of the country

Each of these is thought to derive directly from Clovis, in some cases apparently differing only in the length of the fluting on their projectile points. Numerous reasons have been suggested for these period differences, although this is generally held to be the result of normal cultural change through time (Gary Haynes, The Early Settlement of North America: The Clovis Era, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2002, p52). One such reason given is the so-called climate change of the Younger Dryas postglacial period about 14,500 years ago when it is claimed that Earth's climate began to shift from a cold glacial world to a warmer interglacial state, but partway through this transition, temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere suddenly returned to near-glacial conditions, based on a flower (Dryas octopetala) that grows in cold conditions that became common in Europe during this time. This cold period is said to have ended suddenly in Greenland, based on annual lake sediment layers.
    However, regarding the fluted and bifacial percussion flaking projectile points, according to Science Direct this entire concept is “highly debated” among anthropologists and archaeologists. Even its origins are under scientific siege and disagreement. In addition, stone tool assemblages appear more geographically and temporally diverse than traditionally assumed, that is, previously believed artifacts were determined by anthropologists to exist in certain time frames of history; however, recent discoveries of sites in North America do not match that supposed or assumed criteria, therefore, scientists determine other people in different time frames were responsible for these new finds. As an example, the way projectile points were made has determined entire generational settings. It is interesting that while these findings are highly debated among scientists, no one calls into question the overall assumption surrounding them, i.e., that they came from varying different time frames of thousands of years, such as illustrated above in the 3,400 year period of pre-clovis and paleo-Indian eras, on nothing more than the way a projectile point was made, though the variances are quite insignificant in appearance.

These projectile points were originally named Long Point for the Ray Long Site, Angostura Reservoir, but were renamed Angostura points for the reservoir site to void confusion, since “long” could mean the length and not the site. Note the considerable difference among these projectile points

These points were originally found in the southwest corner of South Dakota on the pine Ridge Reservation; however, since then, they have been found in the Plains regions of the United States and into the Plains of Canada.  They have been reported east into the Great Lakes region and into the Tennessee River valley, and found as far south as the Rio Grande River Basin of Texas and Mexico and into the surrounding regions.
    Since anthropologist and archaeologists determine time periods and therefore cultures, differed over time, consider the case of the medium to large Angostura projectile points—all made in the same era, yet are so totally different (as shown in the image above). Yet, according to anthropologists and archaeologists, one person could not possibly have made two different looking projectile points using different methods in doing so; or two or more people could not have made different projectile points living at the same time in the same area, or even in different areas at the same time. Any difference, to the scientist, has to equate to a different period in history.
    However, despite all of this information, there are simply no remains to speak of other than projectile points, some stone tools, and the mounds, which really show nothing of substance or fact, but merely have led to numerous opinions and assumptions.
(See the next post, “Have They Found Where Battles Were Fought Around Cumorah? – Part III,” for more on the so-called Nephite forts built in North America around the Great Lakes region and specifically the Onondaga lands, and despite the stone tools, projectile points and mounds, what hard evidence of a factual nature can be shown for the North American theories of the Land of Promise, and the location of the Hill Cumorah?)