Scientific Dating is Misleading

There are seven initial assumptions made about time dating through carbon-14 radiocarbon dating techniques and time clocks, that need to be clearly understood for any accuracy to exist within the clocks. That is, each of these assumptions MUST be accurate and must have ALWAYS existed for any specimen tested and dated. Seven of these fragile assumptions are:

1. Each system has to be a closed system; that is, nothing can contaminate any of the parents or the daughter products while they are going through their decay process—-or the dating will be thrown off. Ideally, in order to do this, each specimen tested needs to have been sealed in a jar with thick lead walls for all its previous existence, supposedly millions of years! However, in actual field conditions, there is no such thing as a closed system. One piece of rock cannot for millions of years be sealed off from other rocks, as well as from water, chemicals, and changing radiations from outer space.

2. Each system must initially have contained none of its daughter products. A piece of uranium 238 must originally have had no lead or other daughter products in it. If it did, this would give a false date reading. However, it is impossible to confirm this. It is impossible to know what was initially in a given piece of radioactive mineral. Was it all of this particular radioactive substance or were some other indeterminate or final daughter products mixed in? We do not know; we cannot know. Men can guess; they can apply their assumptions, come up with some dates, announce the consistent ones, and hide the rest, which is exactly what time dating science does!

3. The process rate must always have been the same. The decay rate must never have changed. However, we have no way of going back into past ages and ascertaining whether that assumption is correct. Every process in nature operates at a rate that is determined by a number of factors. These factors can change or vary with a change in certain conditions. Rates are really statistical averages, not deterministic constants. The most fundamental of the initial assumptions is that all radioactive clocks, including carbon 14, have always had a constant decay rate that is unaffected by external influences—-now and forever in the past. But it is a known fact among scientists that such changes in decay rates can and do occur. Laboratory testing has established that such resetting of specimen clocks does happen. Field evidence reveals that decay rates have indeed varied in the past. The decay rate of any radioactive mineral can be altered if 1) the mineral is bombarded by high energy particles from space (such as neutrinos, cosmic rays, etc.); 2) there is, for a time, a nearby radioactive mineral emitting radiation; 3) physical pressure is brought to bear upon the radioactive mineral; or 4) if certain chemicals are brought in contact with it.

4. The decaying half-life of a specimen has never changed. However, at least one researcher, John Joly of Trinity College, Dublin, spent years studying pleochroic halos emitted by radioactive substances. In his research he found evidence that the long half-life minerals have varied in their decay rate in the past! According to Kovarik of the National Research Council, “this would set aside all possibilities of age calculation by radioactive methods."

5. If any change occurred in past ages in the blanket of atmosphere surrounding our planet, this would greatly affect the clocks in radioactive minerals. Cosmic rays, high-energy mesons, neutrons, electrons, protons, and photons enter our atmosphere continually at near the speed of light, some rays traveling 4600 feet into the ocean depths. The blanket of air covering our world is equivalent to 34 feet of water, or 4 feet thickness of lead. If at some earlier time this blanket of air was more heavily water-saturated, it would produce a major change in the atomic clocks within radioactive minerals. And prior to the time of the Flood, there was a much greater amount of water in the air.

6. The Van Allen radiation belt encircles the globe about 450 miles above Earth and is intensely radioactive. According to Van Allen, high-altitude tests revealed that it emits 3000-4000 times as much radiation as the cosmic rays that continually bombard the earth.” Any change in the Van Allen belt would powerfully affect the transformation time of radioactive minerals. Unfortunately, we know next to nothing about this belt—-what it is, why it is there, or whether it has changed in the past. In fact, the belt was only discovered in 1959. Even small amounts of variation or change in the Van Allen belt would significantly affect radioactive substances.

7. A basic assumption of all radioactive dating methods is that the clock had to start at the beginning; that is, no daughter products were present, only those elements at the top of the radioactive chain were in existence. For example, all the uranium 238 in the world originally had no lead 206 in it, and no lead 206 existed anywhere else. But if either Creation—-or a major worldwide catastrophe (such as the Flood) occurred, everything would begin thereafter with, what scientists call, an "appearance of age." By this it is meant "appearance of maturity." The world would be seen as mature the moment after Creation. Spread before us would be a scene of fully grown plants and flowers. Most trees would have their full height. We would not, instead, see a barren landscape of seeds littering the ground. We would see full-grown chickens, not unhatched eggs. Radioactive minerals would be partially through their cycle of half-lives on the very first day. This factor of initial apparent age would strongly affect our present reading of the radioactive clocks in uranium, thorium, etc.

Thus it cannot be said that radiocarbon dating (carbon-14) is conclusive (or anywhere near accurate) in dating events of the past.

What Happened to Hagoth?

Sometimes one has to laugh at the lack of understanding, or just plain ignorance, of Mesoamerican Theorists who write about matters in the Book of Mormon with such flagrant disregard for actual scripture statements. Here is one by John L. Soenson, considered the guru of Mesoamerican BOM geography, when he writes in his work, “An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon,” on page 269:

“Hagoth, the Nephite ship builder, who failed to return home...the Book of Mormon , of course, says only that the man and his mates disappeared from the knowledge of the people in Zarahemla. For all they knew he might have died at a ripe old age on the west Mexican coast without a suitable vessel in which to make the return voyage.”

Even the most cursory reading of Alma 63 shows that there is no mention of Hagoth going anywhere in his ships. He built them and others emigrated in them (Alma 63:4-6). The scripture clearly tells us while the first ship sailed northward, Hagoth was busy making other ships (Alma 63: 7) and when the first ship returned, it took another load of emigrants northward.

Many have interpreted the comment that Hagoth was a "curious man" as meaning he was an explorer, but the word curious is used here, as in the case of the Liahona being of curious workmanship (1 Nephi 16:10), to indicate his building ability for he was a shipwright. The scriptures tell us he built ships and there is no indication whatever that he was an explorer, discoverer, or adventurer. Nor is there any mention that he disappeared from the knowledge of the people in Zarahemla, or from the knowledge of anyone else in the land of promise.
Simply, the scrptures tell us that he built ships and those ships took people northward, and at least one went somewhere else (no doubt westward). While his ships were sailing, we are told that he was still in the shipyard, building more ships. A person has to be a pretty lazy reader to misunderstand this simple fact, let alone someone who has written several books to tell us what Book of Mormon scripture means.

In addition, why would anyone think that a shipwright who has built several ships, would be shipwrecked in a land of forests and jungle and not be able to build some kind of vessel to take him home?

Did the Mulekits Land Among the Jaredites?

In order to substantiate their Mesoamerican model with the Olmec people claimed to have lived there from an early B.C. period, these Theorists try to connect the Mulekites and Jaredites. Joseph Allen, in his book, “Exploring the lands of the Book of Mormon, page 223, states:

“The Mulekites had direct contact with the Jaredites, as the Mulekites landed in the midst of the Jaredite lands (Alma 22:30)”

Alma 22:30 does not say the Mulekites landed in the Land Northward. When one reads the quoted scripture correctly, and in context with other scriptures, it is clear that Allen's statement is in error. First of all, Amaleki clearly states that the Mulekites landed in the land where Mosiah found them (Omni 1:16) and that they had always dwelt in that same area. Secondly, when reading Alma 22:30 correctly, one should keep in mind what the scripture is about:

a. The land of Desolation
b. The people whose bones were found there
c. The place of first landing of the people destroyed there

Who discovered the bones is a peripheral thought, discussed earlier (Mosiah 8:8), and here used to make sure the reader relates this land and its destroyed people in time and space with earlier scriptural references. Thus, Mormon is saying:

"And it bordered upon the land which they called Desolation, it being so far northward that it came into the land which had been peopled and been destroyed, it being the place of their first landing." (Alma 22:30)

The mistake that is made by Mesoamerican Theorists is in trying to use the peripheral thought as the main emphasis of the scripture. Thus they claim that the place of first landing was for the Mulekites who discovered the bones. But a careful reading of the scriptures before and after show that Mormon is describing the land--not the people--both the land southward and the land northward, and connects the logical relationship with the land northward, i.e., the bones of the people destroyed there: "of whose bones we have spoken, which was discovered by the people of Zarahemla." Thus,

• The people of Zarahemla are connected to the discovery of the bones, which is supported by earlier scriptural reference;

• The bones are connected to the land northward, again supported by previous scripture (Mosiah 8:8).

Thus, the people of Zarahemla are not connected in this scripture to the place of their landing because other scripture talks about their having landed in the area of Zarahemla "where Mosiah found them." (Omni 1:14)

In addition, if the Mulekites had direct contact with the Jareidtes, then Coriantumr would not have been a mystery to them, and his writings could have been interpreted by them, as well as Ether’s writings. But they could not read this, nor did they know who these people were (Mosiah 8:12,19), and needed a Prophet and Seer to interpret this for them (Mosiah 8:13).

How Fast and Far Could a Nephite Walk?

To Mesoamerican Theorists, the Isthmus of Tuantepec, a distance of 144 miles from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific Ocean, is the Nephite Narrow Neck of Land. Because of this pre-determinated distance, these Theorists make outlandish claims to justify their model. Take E. L. Peay, in his book, "The Lands of Zarahemla," page 147, states that the line of fortifications the Nephites built across this 144-mile wide isthmus:

“The length of the fortification was one day's journey for a Nephite, approximately 144 miles wide from the west sea to probably 2/3 way across the Yucatan peninsula.”

This type of irresponsible writing is the worst kind of manipulation of the scripture. First of all, there is obviously no mention of the Yucatan peninsula in the scriptures, nor is there anything mentioned to suggest a whopping 144 miles for a day's journey of a Nephite. To cover 144 miles in a day, a person would have to cover an average of 5.5 miles per hour for 24 straight hours. Even 2/3 of that would be 96 mile, or 4 miles per hour for 24 hours.
What scholars often forget is that the abridger of the record understood that his writing would be for a future people. Since he had no knowledge of what terminology of distances would be known by that future people, he would have to choose a method of travel to make distances understandable. Obviouisly, the one thing that would be consistent then and now is the length of a day—the rotation of the earth in a 24-bour period. The other thing that would seem to be consistent is travel time—that is, how far can the average person walk in a certain length of time.

Thus, Mormon gives us several instances of distance and always connecting days with travel. While Nephi listed travel in both specific days (1 Nephi 2:6; 16:13) and many days (1 Nephi 16:17, 33), Mormon tended toward the specifics. While it took "many days" for Zeniff to reach the land of Lehi-Nephi (Mosiah 9:4), it was a 40-day trip for Ammon (Mosiah 7:5). It took Alma 8 days to reach Helam (Mosiah 23:3) and another 12 days for him to reach the land of Zarahemla (Mosiah 24:25). We often get the impression of this use of many days that it was a long period, sometimes involving months or years.

But when Mormon wants to be specific to illustrate how long something is (as we would typically say in miles today), he tells us how long it would take a person to cover that distance. Thus, 1 1/2 days travel for a Nephite across the narrow neck of land (Alma 22:32), and a day's travel the length of the fortification that had been set up to defend themselves against Lamanite incursions (Helaman 4:7). Since the intent of both these latter instances (as opposed to the travel of Zeniff, Ammon, and Alma) is to convey how wide or long something is, he uses a specific terminology of how long it would take a Nephite to journey from one point to another.

Why a Nephite? Since there were only Nephites and Lamanites in the land of promise, he uses a Nephite since that would be more in keeping with a future people, whom he had likely seen since prophets are typically given a view of the future. Obviously, the Lamanites who were used to traveling in open land as hunters (Enos 1:20) would probably be able to cover more ground than city-dwelling Nephites. Knowing his work would be read by a future people who would be more like the Nephites than the Lamanites, Mormon uses the distance a Nephite could travel.

Thus common sense and logic should tell us that Mormon is trying to convey distance in a way we would understand, and this length of journey would probably be what we could cover today. To suggest a Nephite would travel a full 24-hours without sleeping or resting is disingenuous. Consequently, if the travel time was during a day, it would probably be about 12 hours of actual travel, making the pace 12 miles per hour to cover 144 miles. Or 9 miles per hour in a day and a half journey. Either way, the idea is ridiculous. (2/3 would be 8 and 12 miles per hour)

Before making such outlandish comments, perhaps these Theorists should try walking from Provo to Beaver, about 140 miles, and see how long it takes, and if they would try it for a straight 24 hours, or stop to rest. And that is over flat, paved ground. The Land of Promise would have had hills, cliffs, gorges, valleys, mountains, etc, making coverage on uneven ground much more difficult. Probably a better figure would be about 2 miles an hour, which is maintaining a very brisk walk, or a distance of about 24 miles in a 12 hour period, or 36 miles in a day and a half. Nowhere in all of Mesoamerica do figures like these match.

Purpose of the Brass Plates

According to Milton R. Hunter and Thomas Stuart Ferguson, in their book, ”Ancient America and the Book of Mormon,” Lehi’s interest in the Brass Plates was so the Nephites could retain the Egyptian language. They wrote:

“The prophet Lehi considered it of utmost importance that the Egyptian language and Egyptian script be preserved among his descendants. This was one of the principal reasons for his taking the "brass plates" along to the New World” (Hunter & Ferguson, p 99).

However, numerous scriptures tell us a very different story about the importance of the brass plates and why they were taken to the land of promise. The Lord commanded Lehi to obtain them (1 Nephi 3:4) for his people could not keep the commandments of the Lord without possessing the law (1 Nephi 4:15) and the law was engraven upon the plates of brass (1 Nephi 4:16). Nephi was commanded to kill Laban to obtain these plates for "it is better that one man should perish than a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief." (1 Nephi 4:13).

Around 500 years later, Alma clearly understood the value of these plates when he said, "And these plates of brass, which contain these engravings, which have the records of the holy scriptures upon them, which have the genealogy of our forefathers, even from the beginning" (Alma 37:3). Note the issue here is not the language in which the plates were engraved, but the message upon the plates that was important. Lehi further added that the plates of brass would go forth unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people who were of his seed (1 Nephi 5:18) and Alma passed this on to his sons: "It has been prophesied by our fathers, that they should be kept and handed down from one generation to another, and be kept and preserved by the hand of the Lord until they should go forth unto every nation, kindred and tongue, and people, that they shall know of the mysteries contained thereon." (Alma 37:4).

We are even told why the message on these plates was so important. "Were it not for these things that these records do contain, which are on the plates, Ammon and his brethren could not have convinced so many thousands of the Lamanites of the incorrect tradition of their fathers; yea, these records and their words brought them unto repentance; that is they brought them to the knowledge of the Lord their God, and to rejoice in Jesus Christ their Redeemer." (Alma 37:9)

Hunter and Ferguson can claim the Egyptian language was one of the principal reasons for taking the plates along, but Nephi saw it quite differently: "The plates...were desirable; yea, even of great worth unto us, in somuch that we could preserve the commandments of the Lord unto our children. Wherefore, it was wisdom in the Lord that we should carry them with us, as we journeyed in the wilderness towards the land of promise." (1 Nephi 5:21-22)

When people set out to write about the geography of the Land of Promise and so misconstrue the scriptures to such an extent, regardless of the subject, as Mesoamerican Theorists do, one must wonder about the integrity of the writer and the subject of his writing

Were the Earthquakes Really so Common?

In another attempt to lessen the true meaning of the scriptures, Hugh Nibley wrote: “Highways broken up, and the level roads spoiled, and many smooth places become rough (3 Nephi 8:13, 17-18) needs no commentary since such are the commonest of all earthquakes phenomena. The remarkable thing about such statements is their moderation.” (Nibley, p 268)

However, the scriptures do not suggest moderation of any kind. In fact, they tell us a far different story. Consider that the Nephites had a history of being in this land for around 600 years when the disciple Nephi wrote about the destruction that occurred about 33 A.D. He described those events with the following statements:

• A storm that was worse than any ever known in the land (3 Nephi 8:5)
• Lightning that was worse than any ever known in the land (3 Nephi 8:7)
• The whole face of the land was changed (3 Nephi 8:12)
• The face of the whole earth became deformed (3 Nephi 8:17)
• 6 cities sunk into the earth
• 3 cities were covered with seas
• 1 city was covered with earth
• 5 cities burned with fire (there was no electricity or gas to start these totally destructive fires--it would have taken continual lightning strikes)

Foreseeing this destruction, Samuel the Lamanite wrote regarding the land: "Yea, they shall be rent in twain, and shall ever after be found in broken fragements upon the face of the whole earth, yea, both above the earth and beneath." (Helaman 14:22)

Keep in mind that this destruction occurred in both the Land Southward and the Land Northward, a distance of many hundreds of miles, and the face of the whole earth was deformed, (3 Nephi 8:17) in a destructive event that lasted three hours. (3 Nephi 8:19)

By comparison, earthquake destruction known to modern man occurs over a period of about a minute or less. The horrendous 7.3 earthquake and destruction that hit Haiti in January of this year, called “a catastrophe of major proportions,” lasted between 30 and 40 seconds (some say it lasted one minute which is considered a long time and the cause of so much damage) and was felt 200 miles away, but the damage was centered in a 10-mile area.

The 1994 Northridge 6.7 earthquake lasted between 10 and 20 seconds and created millions of dollars in damage; the 1971 Sylmar 7.0 earthquake lasted about 30 seconds; the 1989 San Francisco 7.0 earthquake lasted about 25 seconds. Between March 18 and March 24 of this year, there were approximately 800 earthquakes in the world under 5.4 on the Richter Scale, about 90% of these in the 2.0 to 4.0 range. It is hard to imagine the type of destruction that a major earthquake “that shook the whole earth as if it was about to divide asunder” (3 Nephi 8:6) and "exceeding great quaking of the whole earth” (3 Nephi 8:12,17) that lasted for three hours (3 Nephi 8:19), but the disciple Nephi described it the best he could—-and such a notable event that he took 21 verses to write about it.

It is hard to imagine these prophets wrote in moderation. The destruction listed is far greater and far more widespread than anything ever listed in history. While other catastrophes mention a city here or there or several villages being destroyed, this destruction totally wiped off the face of the earth without leaving a trace of 10 major cities. In addition, five were destroyed in fires, and others were completely leveled with nothing but a jumble of rocks and earth left to mark their place (3 Nephi 8:14). By comparison, numerous buildings were destroyed in a compact city during the recent Haiti earthquake, but the damage was localized to the city and surrounding villages in a ten mile radius.

We talk today about earthquakes that last a few seconds and cause untold damages—-but the Nephite earthquake destruction lasted three hours! While the prophet telling us of this event was far more interested (2 Nephi 9:2, 9, 11) in the cause (wickedness) than the results (physical destruction), he still gives us a clear picture of how vast and widespread was this destruction and nowhere does it show moderation or that the event was not significant in altering the face of the entire land of promise.

No Major Mountains?

Hugh Nibley wrote that “The Book of Mormon mentions the rising and sinking of the land, forming new "hills and valleys" (3 Nephi 9:5-8)—with no mention of major mountain ranges.” (Nibley p 267)

Mountain peaks are measured not only by elevation (height above sea level), but also by prominence, that is, the prominence of a peak is the height of the peak’s summit above the lowest contour line encircling it and no higher summit.

In Central America only two mountains with prominences over 10,000 feet exist, and only one is in Mesoamerica, Volcan Tajumutco, San Marcos, Guatemala; only one 7,000 feet, Volcan Tacana, only four are 6,000 feet, and one 5,000 feet, all in Guatemala. The highest elevation is Tajumutco at 13,845 feet, with Tacana at 13,343 feet, and half a dozen at 12,000 feet.

On the other hand, there are peaks in the Andes with more than 20,000 feet of clear prominence, with the tallest peaks in Peru being Huascaran at 22,205 feet, Yeruypaja, 21,709, Coropuna, 21,083, Cuzco, 20,945, Huandoy, 20,852, Ampato, 20,702, Salcantay, 20,574, Huancarhuas, 20,531, Pumasillo, 20,492 , Solimana, 20,068; plus there are 16 peaks in Chile over 20,000 feet; plus one in Ecuador—all from 20,000 feet to about 23,000 feet. Chile has 25 mountain peaks taller than the tallest in Central America; Ecuador has 11 peaks higher, and Peru has 16 peaks higher. In all, there are 102 mountain peaks in the Andean area that exceed 6,000 meters (19,700 feet)
So when Nephi says there shall be mountains carried up (1 Nephi 19:11), the disciple Nephi said, a great mountain will rise over the city Moronihah (3 Nephi 8:10), and when Samuel the Lamanite says “there shall be many places which are now called valleys which shall become mountains, whose height is great" (Helaman 14:23), one can only wonder what Nibley is referring to when he says “with no mention of major mountain ranges.”

Of course, it should be understood that Mesoamerica, as stated above, does not really have much in the way of mountains, let alone tall mountains “whose height is great.” So to qualify Mesoamerica as the Land of Promise, Nibley and other Theorists claim the scriptures say nothing about tall mountains, which is yet another disingenuous approach to the scriptures to prove an erroneous Mesoamerican model.