The Disservice of Manufacturing of Other People – Part I

Numerous Mesoamerican theorists claim that not all the Jaredites were killed, but Ether makes it quite clear that they were all wiped out down to the last man standing, who was Coriantumr. However, problems begin to arise when someone, no matter his credentials, begins to alter or change the simple meaning and intent of the scriptural record, and suggest more is involved, such as did Hugh Nibley when he wrote:  
   “The first rule of historical criticism in dealing with the Book of Mormon or any other ancient text is, never oversimplify...only the laziness and vanity lead the student to the early conviction that he has the final answers on what the Book of Mormon contains.”
    While this might be true of ancient texts that involve unknowns, it is not true of the scriptural record, which was written for our understanding and edification. After an additional writing to show how historically people have gone astray in not understanding matters in general and religion specifically, he quotes, in part from Joseph Smith that, “good members of the Church are charged with two follies...[the second] interpreting the Bible strictly in the light of their own limited experience.” Then Nibley goes on to add, “Turning to the Book of Mormon, is it not possible thy are also to fall into the old sectarian vice of over-simplifying,” concluding that “it is pertinent to the case of the Jaredites to ask, what does the Book of Mormon mean by “destroyed”? claiming that the word destroy means, in part, to “wreck the structure but not annihilate the parts.” 

However, we find the opposite in Noah Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language, the word “destroy” meant at the time and location where Joseph Smith was translating the plates, “to annihilate,” “to make desolate,” “to kill,” “to extirpate” (pluck up by the roots, to eradicate, to totally destroy), “to cause to cease,” “to put an end to."
    Even so, Nibley, after talking about the use of “destroyed” in ancient Israel, then quotes two examples, the first regarding the Jews at Jerusalem: “I know that the day must shortly come that they must be destroyed, save only a few...” (1 Nephi 17:43), and the second, regarding Jerusalem itself, “after the Messiah hath arisen from the dead...behold Jerusalem shall be destroyed again...” (2 Nephi 25:14).
    The problem arises when people, no matter how brilliant or educated, fail to understand what is written when they start trying to make their point. Consider the above two examples, we need to keep in mind:
1. When stating a word with a specific meaning, its meaning is conclusive unless otherwise depicted or altered. That is, when something dies, it dies, i.e., ceases to exist, ceases to live, a permanent cessation of all vital functions, becomes dead. This means, that in “the motor died,” it ceased its function—it does not mean it cannot be restored. On the other hand, “the cat died,” means it cannot be restored. The difference lies in the “object” of the usage, one being a living thing and the other being non-living or inanimate. However, in “the game,” “the movie,” “his life,” ended, all carries its own meaning, whether an inanimate or living object.
    When the scriptural record states “I know that the day must shortly come that they must be destroyed, save only a few,” it is not a misuse of the word “destroy,” it is completely accurate. It is like saying, “All ten thousand will die, except for a few.” There is no confusion in that statement, other than not knowing how many “a few” represents. If that was an issue, then the correct statement would be “All ten thousand died, except for three.” Either way, both statements are exact and accurate.

So in the statement, “I know that the day must shortly come that they must be destroyed, save only a few” (1 Nephi 17:43), we need to know in what way the statement was used, and in so doing, we find that it is not misleading, nor does it require further understanding. Its meaning is quite clear, especially when the full statement is read: “And now, after all these things, the time has come that they have become wicked, yea, nearly unto ripeness; and I know not but they are at this day about to be destroyed; for I know that the day must surely come that they must be destroyed, save a few only, who shall be led away into captivity” (1 Nephi 17:43).
    Obviously, Nephi is saying that all will be destroyed except for a few, and that few will be led away into captivity. This is not rocket-science, merely English 101.
2. In the second example above, “after the Messiah hath arisen from the dead...behold Jerusalem shall be destroyed again...” (2 Nephi 25:14). In this case, the full scripture is pretty much the same meaning; however to understand further what is meant we need only read the next verse as well: “And behold it shall come to pass that after the Messiah hath risen from the dead, and hath manifested himself unto his people, unto as many as will believe on his name, behold, Jerusalem shall be destroyed again; for wo unto them that fight against God and the people of his church. Wherefore, the Jews shall be scattered among all nations; yea, and also Babylon shall be destroyed; wherefore, the Jews shall be scattered by other nations” (2 Nephi 25:14-15).
    Now we understand what is meant. And, knowing history, we can easily state it as the Jews as a nation or kingdom was destroyed by Babylon and then, after several hundred years, regained its national status once again, only to be destroyed as a nation by the Romans shortly after the crucifixion. It was not reinstated as a sovereign power again until 1948, nearly two thousand years later. Thus, in both cases, the word destroyed was used accurately, i.e., Israel ceased to exist as a sovereign nation, kingdom or power as stated.

In 1946, Israel had no control over any of the land that once made up the kingdom of Judah that had been destroyed. In 1948 and through to now, the State of Israel has been reinstalled and now controls nearly all of the land it once held

Thus, in both cases, the above argument is fallacious: 1) all the Jews were not destroyed according to the very scripture quoted—all but a few; and 2) that Jerusalem would be destroyed—which it was and did not again exist for nearly 2,000 years. In both cases, the text itself is explicit and exact. In the first, it says a few will be spared (in Jerusalem) which is what took place; in the second, the city and the people will no longer exist in their present place and in their present condition—that is, as a separate and distinct people, which is exactly what happened.
    History has borne out both examples—only a few Jews were spared from the wars that brought them into subjectivity; first destroying forever the northern kingdom of Ephraim and leading the ten tribes into oblivion where only God knows of their existence; and in leading of Judah into captivity and removing them as a people from the area of Jerusalem.
    In the second, the city of Jerusalem, as the home of the Jews and the temple of Solomon, and of the covenant people, was destroyed—not to arise in this same sense for nearly 2,000 years. Also, the Jerusalem representing the “idea” of the Jews, that is, their homeland and place of worship, heritage, and promise, ceased to exist after the Messiah rose, with the Jews scattered throughout the world and ceasing to exist as a people within their homeland. These are hardly examples of not being destroyed in the literal sense—that is, annihilated, cease to exist—in fact, are excellent examples of the word “destroy” being used as it was with the Jaredite nation.
(See the next post,” The Disservice of Manufacturing of Other People – Part II, for more on the meaning of “destroyed” and the annihilation of the Jaredite kingdom)

Potter’s Placement of the City of Mulek – Part II

Continuing from the previous article regarding the location of the city of Mulek and the other information provided by George Potter regarding his chosen location in a submitted article. 
   As discussed in the previous article, the reason why Potter has to move his Lamanite army fifty miles in a short period of time, is because in his search for a likely location for the city of Mulek in his scenario in southwestern Peru, the only nearby ruins of an ancient city to Nazca, was 54 miles to the south. However, it is one thing to make a claim on paper of a movement of troops, but something else entirely for that movement to ring true and be realistic. Fifty-four miles in a day and a half is simply out of the question to claim that the Lamanite army chased Teancum’s Nephite army that distance in such a short time—and to do so without supplies as Potter states: “Undoubtedly, the Lamanites would not have been carrying their camping provisions.”
    While movies and books don’t dwell on the supply train of any army movement, no army can move without food and supplies—and no army is going to chase an enemy for a day and a half without stopping to eat along the way.

    Patton’s remarkable achievement, with mobile transportation over existing roads, averaged a speed of .96 miles per hour. At that rate, it would have taken the Lamanites, marching on foot, fifty-two hours to travel fifty miles that Patton’s mobilized army did.

    As ridiculous as that scenario might be considered, Potter makes another mistake about his choosing Tambo Viejo as the city of Mulek. First of all, Mormon tells us the city was fortified.
    Of fortifying or fortifications, Mormon makes it clear that Moroni caused his army to “also building walls of stone to encircle them about, round about their cities and the borders of their lands; yea, all round about the land. And in their weakest fortifications he did place the greater number of men; and thus he did fortify and strengthen the land which was possessed by the Nephites” (Alma 48:8-9). In addition, Mormon explains that fortifications were “erections” when he explained that Moroni, “caused them to erect fortifications that they might secure their armies and their people from the hands of their enemies” (Alma 50:9, emphasis added).
    Thus, Mormon tells us that “when the Lamanites saw this they were affrighted; and they abandoned their design in marching into the land northward, and retreated with all their army into the city of Mulek, and sought protection in their fortifications” (Alma 52:2), he is obviously referring to a fortified city with "erected fortifications," i.e., solid walls for defense. “Teancum thought it was not expedient that he should attempt to attack them in their forts” (Alma 52:5). Also, that Teancum “resolved upon a plan that he might decoy the Lamanites out of their strongholds” (Alma a 52:21).
    Now, understanding that the city of Mulek was a fortified city, and that as a city it was surrounded by a fortified wall of stone, we compare that to the ruins found at Tambo Viejo, Potter’s suggestion for the city of Mulek, and learn that Tambo Viejo is on the southern outskirts of the city of Acari, along the eastern banks of the Acari River, as well as extensive ruins on the west bank between the river and the highway from Lomas to Santa Lucia, with the ruins of Tambo Viejo flowing over and covering the hill of Otapara in the Acari Valley.
    Consider that, according to Dr. Aleš Hrdičksa, Curator, Divison of Physical Anthropology, U.S. National Museum (Anthropological work in Peru, in 1913, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 1914) there were foundation walls in the ruins of Tambo Viejo, but not exterior walls nor was Tambo Viejo a walled city as Mulek would have been to present such a fortified obstacle to Teancum wanting to attack the Lamanites in Mulek. As Mormon describes it, “it came to pass that Teancum made preparations to make an attack upon the city of Mulek, and march forth with his army against the Lamanites; but he saw that it was impossible that he could overpower them while they were in their fortifications; therefore he abandoned his designs and returned again to the city Bountiful, to wait for the coming of Moroni, that he might receive strength to his army" (Alma 52:17).

According to Lidio M. Valdez, Tambo Viejo was mostly built of platform pyramids and individual  houses, all of rounded river stone

In addition, Lidio M. Valdez, an historical anthropologist of the MacEwan University, Edmonton, Canada, states: “studies carried out by different researchers indicate that early Nazca settlements were small unfortified villages dispersed along the course of the rivers (Human decapitation and fortified settlements in the Acari Valley, Peru, Conference paper, Journal of Andean Archaeology Vol 34, No2, May 2017). In fact, he also states that the first fortified cities in the Acarti Valley did not begin until around 100 A.D., which would be about 150 years after Moroni’s death (Lidio M. Valdez, “Fortified Settlements and the Origins of Conflict in the Acari Valley, Peru,” South American Archaeology Seminar, May 2012, UCL Institute of Archaeology)

By Comparison, this is an image of Tambo Colorado, an obvious walled city with a wall around the entire complex—something missing in Tambo Viejo

Despite all of these obvious problems, Potter goes on to say: “Given the above evidence, I believe that the city of Nasca in Peru is the best known candidate for the ancient Book of Mormon city of Bountiful.”
    Now, in order to set the stage and understand the locations, we need to follow the events taking place between Moroni, Teancum, and the Lamanites army in the scriptural record:
• While Moroni was engaged in the Land of Zarahemla contending with the rebellious Nephite King Men (Alma 51:14);
• Amalickiah came down at the head of his Lamanite army (Alma 51:9,12);
• Lamanites captured several Nephite cities, all of which were on the east borders by the seashore (Alma 51:26, emphasis added) moving northward toward Bountiful;
• The Lamanites marched to the borders of the land Bountiful driving the Nephites before them (Alma 51:28);
• Teancum, who had killed Morianton and stopped the King Men’s efforts to gain the Land Northward (Alma 51:29);
• Teancum also stopped the Lamanites northward movement (Alma 51:31);
• Teancum pitched his tents in the borders of the land Bountiful, and Alalickiah pitched his tents on the beach by the seashore (Alma 51:32);
• Teancum kills Amalickiah (51:34, 37);
• Lamanites retreat into the city of Mulek (Alma 52:2);
• Moroni tells Teancum to fortify the land Bountiful and secure the narrow pass into the Land Northward (Alma 52:9);
• Moroni still by the West Sea near Zarahemla was dealing with another Lamanite army (Alma 52:12);
• Moroni who was protecting the west and south borders of the land of Zarahemla, later headed to the land of Bountiful to assist Teancum (Alma 52:15);
• Moroni arrives in the land of Bountiful (Alma 52:18);
• A plan to draw the Lamanitesout of the city of Mulek is devised (Alma 52:19);
• Teancum took a small number of men and marched down near the seashore (Alma 52:22);
• The Lamanites leave the city of Mulek and chase after Teancum, who retreats down by the seashore northward (Alma 52:23);
• Part of Moroni’s army retakes Mulek (Alma 52:24), and the other part follows the Lamanites who are pursuing Teancum (Alma 52:26);
• Lamanites pursue Teancum all the way to nearly the city of Bountiful (Alma 52:27);
• Lehi, who had been left to guard the city of Moroni, intercepted the Lamanite army pursuing Teancum (Alma 52: 27-28);

• The Lamanites found themselves surrounded by three Nephite armies of Moroni, Lehi, and Teancum (Alma 52:31).

Mormon tells us that the city of Mulek is "far to the north" along "the east seashore," with a plain between it and the city of Bountiful 

In all of this, we see that the city of Mulek was along the Sea East, with a Plain (Alma 52:20) between Mulek and the city of Bountiful, which was to the west of Mulek. Now a “Plain” is defined as “a large area of flat land with few trees.” It could be a “grassland, prairie, flatland, lowland, pasture, meadowland, savanna, steppe, tableland, tundra pampass or veld.” In geography, a plain is “a flat, sweeping landmass that generally does not change much in elevation; plains occur as lowlands along the bottoms of valleys or on the doorsteps of mountains, as coastal plains and as plateaus or uplands." Note, that in all of this, it is not described as a desert as Potter claims.

While plains are described as nearly every type of flat, level ground, they are not described as a desert

In fact, according to Geoff C. Brown, et al, in Understanding the Earth (Cambridge University Press, 1992, p 93), plains are one of the major landforms on earth, where they are present on all continents, and would cover more than one-third of the world’s land area. Plains would generally be listed under the grassland (temperate or subtropical), steppe (semi-arid), savannah (tropical), or tundra (polar) biomes (Vivien Gornitz, Encyclopedia of Paleoclimatology and Ancient Environments, Springer Nature International Publisher, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2009, p 665). It is also important to know that plains are often connected with agriculture and planting—something that would never include a desert. In fact, plains in many areas are important for agriculture because where the soils were deposited as sediments and would be deep and fertile, while the flatness facilitates mechanization of crop production; or because they support grasslands which provide good grazing for livestock. Either way, the idea of a desert would simply not fit the description of a Plain.
    The point is, that choosing Tambo Viejo as the city of Mulek is neither consistent with the scriptural record and descriptions Mormon gives us, nor the reasonable understanding of the events surrounding the city of Mulek.

Potter’s Placement of the City of Mulek – Part I

A friend sent me an article on George Potter's claimed location of the city of Mulek, in which his description of parts of Peru, which he also claims is the site of the Nephite Nation Land of Promise, has stated: “Given the evidence, I believe that the city of Nasca in Peru is the best known candidate for the ancient Book of Mormon city of Bountiful” (Potter, “Discovering the City of Mulek,” an article in a link sent to us:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B75Vhjs6vnRkazBad1RjbXhBeFE/view)
    Potter than goes on to suggest that the city of Bountiful is actually the city of Nasca (Nazca) located in southwestern Peru, by stating: “The archaeological record confirms that prior to the fall of Zarahemla in 34 B.C., there was an extension of Pukara (Zarahemla) influence over the Nasca Empire, which is a likely candidate for the city of Bountiful. Archaeologists have concluded that the most important civilization to arise west of Pukara empire in the first century BC was its sister city of the Nasca Empire.”

Map from Potter’s article, with the location of Tambo Viejo added for clarity of relationship of these locations. Note that Potter claims the city of Nephi (Cuzco) is north of his city of Zarahemla (Pucara), and his city of Bountiful (Nazca) is due west of his city of Nephi, and that his city of Mulek is on the West Coast—all contrary to Mormon’s clear descriptions

The problem with his thinking is that it does not match the clear descriptions given to us by Mormon of these locations. Let’s take them one by one:
1. Location of City of Nephi and City of Zarahemla—Potter has Nephi north of Zarahemla; however, according to Mormon’s description, the Land of Nephi was south of Zarahemla and “was divided from the land of Zarahemla by a narrow strip of wilderness, which ran from the sea east even to the sea west, and round about on the borders of the seashore, and the borders of the wilderness which was on the north by the land of Zarahemla” (Alma 22:27);
2. Location of city of Nephi to Bountiful—Potter claims Bountiful was due west of Nephi; however, according to Mormon’s description, the Land of Bountiful was far to the north of the Land of Nephi, and tells us that the Nephites were to the north of the Lamanites: “the Nephites had taken possession of all the northern parts of the land bordering on the wilderness…on the north even until they came to the land which they called Bountiful” (Alma 22:29);
3. Location of the City of Mulek—Potter places Mulek along the West Coast, due west of Zarahemla; however, Mormon tells us that the city of Mulek was on the east sea shore: “the city of Nephihah, and the city of Lehi, and the city of Morianton, and the city of Omner, and the city of Gid, and the city of Mulek, all of which were on the east borders by the seashore” (Alma 51:26, emphasis added). It should be noted at this point that it was Moroni with an army who was along the west sea, not Teancum, who was on the east seashore, along with the city of Mulek. As Mormon states: “And he also said unto him, I would come unto you, but behold, the Lamanites are upon us in the borders of the land by the west sea; and behold, I go against them, therefore I cannot come unto you.”

Map from Potter’s article, with the location of his city of Bountiful and his city of Mulek (Tambo Viejo) shown and the distance he claims between the two, supporting his claim that the Teancum marched south past Mulek 

4. Location of Mulek to the city of Bountiful—Potter claims Mulek was 54 miles south of the city of Bountiful; however, Mormon, who has already told us that Mulek is along the east sea shore, also states: “Moroni and his army…was on the west of the city of Mulek” (Alma 52:22), so when the Lamanite army came out after Teancum, they were to the east of Moroni, between Teancum’s force and that of Moroni, and Teancum, luring the Lamanites away from Mulek, did “retreat down by the seashore, northward” (Alma 52:23). Now, the city of Mulek was on the “east borders by the seashore” (Alma 51:26), so when Teancum retreated down by the seashore, it was the east sea shore, and he retreated northward, not southward where Potter places Mulek.

The pyramid of Cahuachi, the administrative center of the Nazca culture

Despite all of this, Potter, maintaining his map locations, states: “If Nasca is the city of Bountiful, then the remains of the city of Mulek should be relatively nearby.” He then sums it up by saying, “This is a reasonable assumption since the Lamanite army that pursued Teancum army from the city of Mulek to a location near to the city of Bountiful (Alma 52:23,27).” He then goes on to ask: “So what is a reasonable distance for a long sustained march by soldiers? Carrying their camping gear, the Roman legions were trained to march 25 miles in 5 hours."
    The problem with this is it is completely inaccurate according to the Roman military historian Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus, known simply as Vegetius, who wrote in great detail how the Roman military organized itself (Epitoma rei militaris [Epitome of Military Science], translated by N. P. Milner, University Press, Liverpool, England, 1993)--an original work used by world militaries for centuries. Based on Harry Pratt Judson in Caesar's Army: the Evolution, Compositon,Tactics, Equipment & Battles of the Roman Army (Ginn Publishers, Boston, 1888), who quotes Vegetius that Kit weight: 30-40 pounds; Pace: 40,000 quick step of 2.5 feet at a cadence of 100 to 120 steps per minute (a baseline number still used today in modern Infantry); Distance: 15-20 miles in seven hours; Average speed: 1-3 miles per hour depending on terrain (best area beside a road, not on it). In fact, for short distances, the Roman army marched at the rate of 4.83 kph (3 miles per hour), and for long-distance sustained marches, the Roman Army marched from seven to nine and a half hours a day at the rate of 2.41 kph (1.5 miles per hour). Scipio Africanus, often called Scipio the Great, a Roman general and later consul who is often regarded as one of the great generals and military strategists of all time, marched his legions on an average of 26 miles a day to get from Tarraco (Tarrangona) to Carthago Nova (Cartagena) along the southeast coast of Spain, in six days, but those were extreme numbers on a very forced march, usually it would be only half that amount. 

    It should also be noted that the average marching rate for foot-borne, pre-industrial armies has been a consistent ten miles a day. Only a few exceptionally well organized forces, like the Roman legions, could march more than that on a regular basis. And the Roman Army hit its normal cadence at a rate of 15-mile march a day. They would force march on occasion, but this was rarely before battle (forced march meant longer distance, not faster speed). After all, they wanted their soldiers rested before an encounter.    Potter continues, "The Lamanite army appears to have left the city of Mulek in the morning believing they were going into immediate combat with Teancum's small army outside the city walls. It was only when they were outside the city fortifications that they realized that they had to pursue the much smaller Nephite army. On the open plains (Alma 52:20) the Lamanites "pursued them with vigor" (Alma 52:24). Undoubtedly, the Lamanites would not have been carrying their camping provisions.”
    Potter's purpose in all of this is to come up with a distance between the two cities. He goes on to state: “The Book of Mormon does not state how long the Lamanites chased Teancum's army. It could have been a day, a day and a night, or even longer. However, we know that by the time they were intersected by Lehi's army, the Lamanites were "wearied because of their march."
    Of course, any fast-paced march is going to “weary” an army, but the reason for mentioning this is in the rest of the sentence, when Mormon compares the condition of the Lamanites with that of a fresh Nephite army under the command of Lehi who just joined the conflict. Mormon states: “when the chief captains of the Lamanites had beheld Lehi with his army coming against them, they fled in much confusion, lest perhaps they should not obtain the city Mulek before Lehi should overtake them; for they were wearied because of their march, and the men of Lehi were fresh” (Alma 52:28, emphasis added).

Terrain south of Nazca

Potter goes on to tell us: “The terrain along the seashore south of the city of Nasca (Bountiful) is mostly flat gravel plains where foot-soldiers could cover a great distance in a single day. Further, we know that by the time the Lamanites neared the city of Bountiful, Lehi and his small army confronted them. Assuming that the Lamanite pursued the Nephites for a day and a night, it is likely that they could have covered 50 miles or more before becoming wearied and not fully prepared for battle (Alma 52:28).”
    First of all, the terrain around Nazca, especially to the south, is desert, called the Peruvian Desert or the Nazca Desert, with some of this gravel and some of it sand. It is also quite hilly in places. Potter seems to think that men could march for 50 miles at a fast pace through such terrain. After all, Mormon tells us that: “when the Lamanites saw that he began to flee, they took courage and pursued them with vigor”—a word which is defined as “passion, zest, drive,” “active strength,” ”get-up-and-go,” and “intensity of action.” Thus, it can be suggested that the Lamanite army, in the very beginning of the chase, increased their efforts to catch up to Teancum’s army and that the pursuit was both fast-paced and strenuous. The idea of continuing such a pursuit for fifty miles is without a doubt beyond the normal capacity of most men under such circumstances—and no leader, knowing at the end of the chase, a battle to the death would take place, is going to tax his force so greatly as to render them incapable of fighting once they catch up.

    To put this in perspective, General George Patton, in December of 1944, in the relief of Bastogne during what became known as the Battle of the Bulge, desperately moved his Third Army of three divisions seventy-five miles in seventy-two hours and attacked the southern flank of the salient or preeminent German army against severe criticism of numerous other generals. While this was a remarkable achievement, going against everything the Army preached, it should be kept in mind that Patton’ three armored divisions had tanks and trucks in which to move his troops. Even so, “such speed of movement had never seemed possible over such a large distance until then.”Patton’s race across Belgium to relieve Bastogne

    Again, to put this in perspective, Patton moved his mobile armored army seventy-five miles along existing roads and highways in three days, Potter is suggesting that the Lamanites marched (on foot) across graveled flatland for fifty miles in a day and a half and were “wearied.”
(See the next post, “Potter’s Placement of the City of Mulek – Part II,” for more information why the City of Mulek was not located on the west coast and not the ruins of Tambo Viejo as George Potter claims)

Another Look at the Uplift of the Andes

For those who still struggle with, and cannot seem to get their mind around, the fact that the Andes Mountains rose suddenly and in the time of man, we submit the following: 
   According to Rollin Thomas Chamberlin, one time managing editor of the Journal of Geology, the leading independent geology journal in the US., and professor of geology at Chicago University, stated: “The rise of the Andes is said to have shaken the whole world. Hundreds if not thousands of cubic miles of the body of the earth almost instantaneously heaved upward producing violent earthquakes which spread throughout the globe...The Rockies as well as the Andes form a chain a third the circumference of the globe, were undergoing simultaneous orogenic movement with deluging waves sent careening over the land...The Andes rose many thousands of feet in the age of Man amid much volcanic activity” (“The Origin and History of the Earth,” found in Moulton’s The World and Man as Science Sees Them, edited by Forest Ray Moulton, Garden City, NY, Doubleday, Doran, 1937, p 80).
    Another celebrated authority, Eduard Suess, an Austrian geologist and professor of paleontology and of geology at the University of Vienna, a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, a recipient of the Wollaston Medal of the Geological Society of London, and author of Das Antlitz der Erde (The Face of the Earth), which was a popular textbook for many years between 1885 and 1901, also wrote in much the same vein as Chamberlin, when he said: “The earthquakes of the present day are certainly but faint reminiscences of those telluric movements to which the structure of almost every mountain range bears witness. Numerous examples of great mountain chains suggest by their structure episodic disturbances of such indescribable and overpowering violence, that the imagination refuses to follow the understanding” (D.S Allan & J.B. Delair, Cataclysm, “Compelling Evidence of a Cosmic Catastrophe,” St. Martin’s Press, 1995).

Site of Tiahuanaco on the south shores of Lake Titicaca. This bustling city along with the lake itself, was once at sea level, and the lake was once part of the ocean waters before being uplifted several thousand feet among the Andes Mountains

In Peru, in the case of Tiahuanaco, the change in altitude apparently occurred after the city was built, and this could not have been the result of a slow process that required hundreds of thousands of years to produce a visible alteration. Major Leonard Darwin, president of the Royal Geographical Society, Chairman of the British Eugenics Society, and later Honorary President until his death, offered the conclusion that the mountain had risen considerably after the city had been built.
    The ruins at the south end of Lake Titicaca, now at 12,500 feet elevation, poses a mystery that has puzzled the experts for several centuries. According to Sir Clements Robert Markham, the English geographer, explorer, and writer, as well as Secretary of the Royal Geographical Society and later President of the Society for 12 years, on speaking of Tiahuanaco where he spent much time in research in 1852-53, “The region is only capable of sustaining a scanty population of hardy mountaineers and laborers, yet the city once held tens of thousands of people, and covers a large area, and was built by highly skilled masons, and with the use of enormous stones” (Markham, The Incas of Peru, E.F. Dutton, New York, 1912, p 21)
    Emmet John Sweeney, The Evidence of Science, stated: “At one time Tiahuanaco was a port: Lake Titicaca was ninety feet higher…the old shore line, still clearly visible, is titled dramatically, obviously as a result of massive earthquake activity. In some places it is actually 350 feet above the present level of the lake” (“The Ruins of South America,” The Evidence of Science, Algora Publishing, New York, 2010, p93)
    “Once Tiahuanacu was at the water’s edge…with numerous raised beaches” (H. P. Moon, The Geology and Physiography of the Altiplano of Peru and Bolivia, The Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, 3^rd Series, Vol 1 Pt 1 1939, p 32).

Just north of Ollantaytambo in the Sacred Valley is the Abra Malagra Pass, just east beyond the Nevado Veronica, a pyramid-shaped mountain peak that overlooks Machu Picchu

In fact, one scientific author has stated: “Further investigation into the topography of the Andes and the fauna of Lake Titicaca, together with a chemical analysis of this lake and others on the same plateau, established that the plateau was at one time at sea level, or 12,500 feet lower than it is today…Titicaca and Lake Poopo, lake and salt bed of Coipaga, salt beds of Uyuni, all have chemical compositions similar to those of the ocean” (Polish-born Bolivian archaeologist Arturo Posnansky, Tiahuanacu, the Cradle of the American Man (1945) p 23).
    As Posnansky also stated: "At a higher elevation the sediment of an enormous dried-up lake, whose waters were almost potable, it is full of characteristic mollusks, such as Paludestrina and Ancylus, which shows that it is, geologically speaking, of relatively modern origin.”
    According to H. P. Moon, “There are numerous raised beaches, and stress was put on “the freshness of many of the strange lines and the modern character of such fossils as occur,” (“The Geology and Physiography of the Altiplano of Peru and Bolivia,” The Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, 3^rd Series, Vol 1 Pt 1,  1939, p32).
    The foothills of the Andes hide numerous deserted towns and abandoned terraces, monuments to a vanished civilization. The terraces that go up the slopes of the Andes, and reach the eternal snow line and continue under the snow to some unidentified altitude prove that it was not a conqueror nor a plague that put the seal of death on the gardens and towns (E. Huntington, Climatic Pulsations in Hylluingsskrift, 1935, p 578).
    Tiahuanaco--more than 400 acres of ruins, only 10% of which have been excavated. Dirt now covers the ancient civilization to a depth of at least 6 feet. The only explanation for this accumulation is water, and obviously, a large amount of water had to have inundated the city. When it receded it left the silt covering all evidence of an advanced civilization, leaving only the largest statues and monoliths still exposed. It is logical to conclude, therefore, that Tiahuanaco was built before the lake was created, and not as a port on its shore.
    As the waters today continue to recede, we should be able to find more evidence of the city's remote peoples. Scientists theorize that the area of Lake Titicaca was at one time at sea level, because of the profusion of fossilized marine life which can be found in the region. The area then lifted with the Andean upheaval and a basin was created which filled in to form the lake.
    The rise of the Andes and the linkage of the Brazilian and Guyana bedrock shields, blocked the Amazon and caused the river to become a vast inland sea. Gradually this inland sea became a massive swampy, freshwater lake and the marine inhabitants adapted to life in freshwater. For example, over 20 species of stingray, most closely related to those found in the Pacific Ocean, can be found today in the fresh waters of the Amazon. Then the waters worked through the sandstone to the west and the Amazon began to flow eastward. At this time the Amazon rainforest was born. During the Ice Age, sea levels dropped and the great Amazon lake rapidly drained and became a river. Later, the ocean level receded enough to expose the Central American isthmus and allow mass migration of mammal species between the Americas.
In a paper of only three pages, Edward Wilber Berry (left) of the Geological Laboratory, John Hopkins University, announced some remarkable fossil evidences which confirm recent physiographic conclusions as to the late uplift of the Central Andes. (The Age of the Bolivian Andes, Proceedings National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 3., April 1917, pp 233—285).
    He showed that there are fossil plants at Coroeoro (13, 000 feet) and Potosi (14,000 feet), which include a fern and tropical trees allied to those now living on the Amazon lowlands, denote a more humid climate and a far lower elevation, and, Berry also says, “the sea deposited a part of these strata on the Bolivian highlands in late Tertiary or Pleistocene time, and since that time there have been differential vertical movements amounting to a minimum of 13, 500 feet.” He also concludes: “There is, then, definite evidence that parts of the high plateau and of the eastern Cordillera once stood at sea level."

    Referring to Charles Darwin once again, on his travels to South America in 1834-35, he was impressed by the raised beaches at Valparaiso, Chile, as well as “curious rocks at Coquimbo in Chile,” and stated that though the former surf line was at an altitude of 1300 feet, he found that the sea shells which littered these ancient beaches were undecayed. He claimed it was obvious that the land had risen 1300 feet from the Pacific Ocean in a very recent period, as he stated, “within the period during which upraised shells remained undecayed on the surface” (Darwin, Geological Observations on the Volcanic Islands and Parts of South America, Part II, Chapter 15, Smith, Elder & Co., London, 1844).
    In various papers in past years Isaiah Bowman, part of the geographic mission in the Yale Peruvian expedition of 1911, has demonstrated the rapid and recent uplift of the Central Andes and more recently in “The Andes of Southern Peru” (Henry Holt, London, 1916) has elaborated a physiographic argument, based on detailed topographic surveys in southern Peru, which concludes that an uplift of at least 7, 000 feet is demonstrable and that it may have been much more. The convergence of the physiographic and the fossil evidence is singularly conclusive, and the full report on the fossil evidence may be expected to form one of the major contributions to the physiographic history of the Andes within the decade.
    There is also much evidence that the Amazon Basin was once a large inland sea that emptied into the Gulf of Mexico in Venezuela, and that the people of the Andes civilization could launch ships in this sea and could carry on trade to Central Aamerica.

The Recent Uprising of the Andes

The age of Tiahuanaco, an ancient city complex along the southern shores of Lake Titicaca on the Peruvian-Bolivian border, has long been a point of controversy among scientists and archaeologists. According to Hans Schindler Bellamy, who spent some time studying Tihuanaco and wrote both The Calendar of Tiahuanaco (1956) and The Great Idol of Tiahuanaco (1959), stated: “The geological record indicates a late elevation of the Andes, and the time of its origin is brought ever closer to our time” (Built Before the Flood: The Problem of the Tiahuanacu Ruins, Faber and Faber, London, (1943, p14).

The ancient city of Tihuantico

Also, according to Frank C. Hibben, archaeologist and anthropologist from Harvard, and Director of the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, stated: “Archaeological and radiocarbon analyses indicate that the age of the Tiahuanaco Andean culture and of the city itself is not much older than four thousand years” (Treasure in the Dust, J. B. Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1951, p56).
    In addition, Immanuel Velikovsky has stated that “Sometime in the remote past the Altiplano was at or below sea level, so that originally its lakes were part of a sea gulf. The last upheaval, however, took place in an early historical period, after the city of Tiahunacu had been built; the lakes were dragged up, and the Altiplano and the entire chain of the Andes rose to their present height” (Earth in Upheaval, Paradigma, 2009, p88; original edition by Doubleday & Company, Inc., Garden City, New York, 1955).
    Charles Ginenthal, in quoting Dr. Carl Sagan, a professor of astronomy from Cornell University discussion at a symposium of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, stated that these cities of Tiahuanaco and those surrounding the area “were built at lower elevations and were uplifted with the Andes about 3,500 years ago when civilization there declined” (Carl Sagan and Immanuel Velikovsky, New Falcon Publications, 1995).

In the distance is the Uspallata Range in South America from which heights Darwin surveyed the mountains that were once under water

It was Charles Darwin, who in 1835 climbed the mountains in the Uspallata Range, 7,000 feet high in the Andes, and looked down on the plain from a little forest of petrified trees broken off a few feet above the ground and wrote in his journal: “It required little geological practice to interpret the marvelous story which this scene at once unfolded; though I confess I was at first so much astonished that I could scarcely believe the plainest evidence. I saw the spot where a cluster of fine trees once waved their branches on the shores of the Atlantic, when the ocean—now driven back 700 miles—came to the foot of the Andes.

Agua de la Zorra Forest where Darwin saw trees at 7,000 feet that had been beneath the ocean in the time of man

Darwin continued: "I saw that they had sprung from volcanic soil which had been raised above the level of the sea, and that subsequently this dry land, with its upright trees, had been let down into the depths of the ocean. In these depths, the formerly dry land was covered by sedimentary beds, and these again by enormous streams of submarine lava—one such mass attaining the thickness of a thousand feet…the ocean here must have been profoundly deep, but again the subterranean forces exerted themselves and now I behold the bed of that ocean, forming a chain of mountains more than seven thousand feet in height.
"Vast and scarcely comprehensible as such changes must ever appear, yet they have all occurred within a period, recent when compared with the history of the Cordillera; and the Cordillera itself is absolutely modern as compared with many of the fossiliferous strata of Europe and America—But how extremely young the cordillera of the Andes is, only the research of recent years has brought out” (Nature, Vol 5, March 28, 1872, pp420-422, where Darwin discussed Hacienda of Quintero, claiming “The proofs of the elevation of this shoreline of coast is unequivocal’).

    While the HMS Beagle was undergoing repairs and Captain FitzRoy faced financial difficulties during July 1834, Darwin had some spare time and at his own expense took a six week land expedition to the east, into the High Andes in Chile and Argentina (see map above). During this journey, Darwin recorded everything he found. In Chapter VII of one of his journals he described the cordilleran geology, particularly the region in Uspallata in Mendoza province. This area today is known as Agua de la Zorra, and called loosely Bosque de Darwin (Darwin’s Forest). It was formalized in the geological reports of Map 3369-09, Uspallata (1997).
    Also is the statement by Norman Macbeth of Stanford and the Harvard Law School, and author of Darwin Retried: An Appeal to Reason (Harvard Common Press, 1971) who states of the Andes: “Apparently all have risen extensively since men moved in, and much of the upthrusting has occurred in the short period since the retreat of the glaciers. It is impossible to express this precisely in years, but the span of time is almost infinitesimal when compared to the figures commonly used by geologists. Needless to say, the upthrusting was not quite an everyday event. Checking a couple of college textbooks…I found that practically nothing was said about mountain building and that the subject seems to baffle the scholars.”

Mountain building that took place when the Earth was still young and the rock still elastic as evidenced by the folds rather than breaks, yet mountains that rose in the very recent past

The orogenic process of mountain building, is where large-scale movements of the Earth's crust (tectonic plates), including folding, faulting, volcanic activity, igneous intrusion and metamorphism leads to the large structural deformation of the Earth’s lithosphere (crust and uppermost mantle) due to the interaction between tectonic plates—this is caused by the geologic activity below the surface, resulting in colliding with one another and buckling up the surface like the hood of a car in a head-on collision.
    Thus the understanding of specific landscape features in terms of the underlying tectonic processes is called tectonic geomorphology, and the study of geologically young or ongoing processes is called neotectonics (recent tectonic movement), sometimes called “active tectonics,” meaning the process is still going on. Obviously, the Andes Mountains are considered “neotectonic” activity, a word coined by Vladimer Obruchev in 1948, to describe recent or “contemporary topography” (V.A. Obruchev, "Osnovnye cherty kinetiki i plastiki neotektonik," Izvestiya Akademiya Nauk, Seriya Geologicheskaya, Vol 5,1948, pp13–24).
    This latter is important for those who believe that mountains have been around for a very long time. As the University of Reno Center for Neotectonic Studies clearly states: “the study of geologically recent motions of the Earth’s crust, particularly those produced by earthquakes, with the goals of understanding the physics of earthquake recurrence, the growth of mountains, and the seismic hazard embodied in these processes."
    “Produced by earthquakes,” an idea championed by Charles Darwin who thought earthquakes had modified the surface of the entire planet (David Brassan, “Darwin the Geologist,” History of Geology, Scientific American, 2012), which should sound rather familiar to us, as in “behold, there was a more great and terrible destruction in the land northward; for behold, the whole face of the land was changed, because of the tempest and the whirlwinds and the thunderings and the lightnings, and the exceedingly great quaking of the whole earth” (3 Nephi 8:12, emphasis added), and “insomuch that it did shake the whole earth as if it was about to divide asunder” (3 Nephi 8:6, emphasis added).

Underlying bedrock determines the surface landscape

The effects of tectonics on landscape are heavily dependent on the nature of the underlying bedrock fabric that more or less controls what kind of local morphology tectonics can shape, and their effects on geomorphology can range from very long periods to minutes or less. As an example, earthquakes, can in terms of minutes, submerge large areas of land creating new wetlands.
    The point of all of this is to remind every reader that, despite the entire geologic and so-called “scientific community” claiming the world is 4.55 billion years old, we have continual evidence before us in these scientific disciplines to show that the world is far, far younger than these so-called experts claim. The fact that we have been taught this from the earliest kindergarten class attended and all through elementary, middle- and high school, and college levels, the world is not billions of years old, though much of what it is made of is that old for it was organized out of existing matter (which cannot be annihilated) and, therefore, is in that category quite old, but as a whole, is very young. So young, in fact, that Carbon-14 in the atmosphere has not been equalized and, in fact, is only about one-third on its way to being so, suggesting that the Earth’s atmosphere is less than 30,000 years old—actually, around 10,000 years.

A Matter of Perspective – Part II

Regarding the “small” or “narrow neck of land” and the “narrow pass” or “passage,” Mesoamericanist Joseph L. Allen claims that the “defensive line must be located near the base (south end) of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec because the line clearly involves the west sea (the Pacific Ocean).”

Allen’s defensive line that has to be along the south end (in orange) blocking off the Pacific Coastal Route; however, as the yellow and white arrows show, routes through the mountains and along the 90-mile wide lowlands of the Gulf Coastal Route would be unguarded. His narrow neck does not close down egress into the Land Northward (to the left) from the Land Southward (to the right)

More from Allen: “From the perspective of Alma 22 and the Lamanite king living in the land of Nephi (valley of Guatemala City) whom Mormon is talking about, the “west sea” is indeed west and is that portion of the west sea in close proximity to the narrow neck of land. In other words, the west sea is the Pacific Ocean based on the content in verses 27 and 32.”

Response: This is simply not correct and totally indefensible. A map clearly shows that the sea is far closer to the south of their city of Nephi than to the west, and there is no reason to say that it was the West Sea, when it is to the south of their narrow neck of land, the narrow passage, and Mesoamerica in particular. In viewing the map, it is easy to see that the Pacific Ocean would be considered to the south of Guatemala, not to the west. Nor can Allen claim one sea in the same area has two different names, like South Sea (north of West Sea) and West Sea to the South. This is simply a play on words in order to place the seas where they do not actually exist, and has nothing to do with the way directional locations were used by the Nephites.
    Allen: “The Location and Nature of the Narrow Pass—A narrow pass is an essential component of any New World isthmus being considered as the “small neck of land between the land northward and the land southward” (Alma 22:32). The term “narrow pass” is used only three times in the Book of Mormon.”
    Response: It is extremely difficult to discern a narrow neck of land between Allen’s Land Northward and Land southward, when his narrow neck is a small outer bank along the south coast of Mexico and has nothing to do with any narrowing of the land as Mormon describes.

There are certain aspects of the narrow neck that should be understood. In 600 B.C., the neck should be such that anyone could have perceived it being “narrow” when standing in the vicinity of it (no aerial photography, NASA satellite photos, etc., would have been available)—it has to be seen by an individual standing in the area that the land narrows, a small neck between two major land masses exists. Such is simply not the case with this area of Mesoamerica. A narrow neck is not a narrow tract of land between a mountain and a sea coast, as this area is, but a neck of land with water on both sides as Mormon states (Mormon 50:34).
    Allen: “Sorenson claims the terms narrow pass/narrow passage and the term narrow neck of land are not synonymous terms. Seemingly, readers can easily discern that the narrow pass was located in the narrow neck of land.”
    Response: Yes, the reader can discern this; what cannot be discerned is Allen’s location for the narrow neck of land, isolated along one coast that does not limit the rest of the land, nor cause the rest of the land to nearly be surrounded by water except for this narrow neck (Alma 22:32).
    Allen, again on Sorenson: “In speaking of the narrow pass, Sorenson, in another source, says: “The pass led to the land northward. Control of the pass was required to get into the land northward (at least that part of interest to the Nephites then).” By “then,” Sorenson is referring to Alma 52:9, which dates to the first century BC. Sorenson is confused. At this point in time (the first century BC), as reflected in Alma 50:34, the Nephites are not on the north side of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Rather, they are on the south side, near the borders of the land Desolation. “By the sea, on the west and on the east” means they were at the west sea (Pacific Ocean/Gulf of Tehuantepec) on both the west side and east side of the narrow pass that led into the narrow neck of land.”

Mesoamericanists seem overly confused about the idea of the Nephites controlling the entrance into the Land Northward. In their model, they are dealing with 144-mile width of a narrow neck. How are you going to defend 144 miles across to keep a group (red arrows) determined to get there from passing through such a width? Or what path would Teancum take to intercept Morianton (green arrows) in the south or in the north?

Response: It seems that Allen is the one confused. On his map, he places Bountiful in the north near the narrow neck of land yet centers his activity in the south along the coast as though this was the only way to get into the Land Northward.
    The problem is, and for some reason not one Mesoamerican theorist seems to understand this rather simple military point—the Isthmus of Tehuantepec is far too wide with difficult terrain (mountains, marshes, flat lands, highlands, etc.) to defend in the era of swords and arrows, which required hand-to-hand combat. Stated in other words, in close fighting. When the Pass that Mormon describes is relegated to a coastal route while many other routes also exist beyond mountains, far to the north, etc., there is simply no way that a military unit of almost any size could have defended such a large area requiring in-close fighting. Today, with machine guns, rocket launchers, mines, canon and aerial bombardment, it could likely be done, but not during Nephite times. After all, the 300 Spartans (actual number around 7,000) at Thermopylae guarded a pass in 480 B.C. against a million Persians (actual number about 150,000) along a Pass about 300 feet wide of great strategic importance as it commanded the way from Thessaly through Lokris and into Boeotia.

View of the Thermopylae pass at the area of the Phocian Wall. In ancient times the coastline was where the modern road lies, or even closer to the mountain

One of the problems we have today in trying to determine a location is that our lives are so different than in Nephite times. Seldom does anyone go anywhere they do not already know the lay of the land, either from topical maps, pictures, aerial or satellite photos, GPS, etc. It is hard to divorce one’s mind from something already known and understood (like Tehuantepec being referred to as an Isthmus) and try to see something as it would have been seen in Nephite times. If theorists would do this, not a single person would consider Tehuantepec to be an isthmus to the Nephites, and referred to as a “small” or “narrow” neck of land—no, not one. It is simply impossible to see and understand Tehuantepec as an isthmus from any source other than being told it is such and seeing aerial maps and photos.

There is no possible way a traveler in 600 B.C. or 400 A.D. could tell this was an isthmus. The narrowing of the land is so slight and the regular distances so great, that to someone in the area without satellite photos or aerial maps, no difference in the land is discernable

Allen: “When going through the southern part of the narrow neck of Tehuantepec and thereby experiencing the narrow pass, travelers can almost “reach out” on both the east side and the west side and touch the massive mountains that rise up as impenetrable barriers to movement and that constitute the heart of the narrow pass through the narrow neck of land.”
    Response: However, neither can they know or tell without being shown, that the land beyond these towering mountains continues northward for 140 miles or so through which are numerous paths from the east (Allen’s south) to the west (Allen’s north). Once you factor that in, it becomes much more clear that they are not seeing what is written in the scriptural record at all.