[Note: A more current version of this document is available on the Signature Books website]
By Dr. Simon Southerton
The following are some of the most frequently advanced arguments from the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) and the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) related to DNA and the Book of Mormon--most notably (or at least most succinctly) in the latter’s brochure, Is an Historical Book of Mormon Compatible with DNA Science? Since these claims have gained some currency within LDS circles and I am frequently asked about them by individuals who have either read my book or otherwise tried to follow developments in this area, I have concluded that it would be best to summarize my responses in an equally succinct manner.
1. The Book of Mormon does not present a testable hypothesis. Some LDS scientists argue that the Book of Mormon does not present a testable hypothesis and that, since other scientists are not testing the Book of Mormon directly, the data collected by non-Mormon scientists is irrelevant to the origin of Book of Mormon people. The question scientists are asking is: "Who are the ancestors of the American Indians?" In fact, about 7,300 American Indians have been DNA tested in scientific experiments aimed at discovering where their founding ancestors came from. The Book of Mormon claims in its introduction that the Book of Mormon people (the Lamanites) "are the principal ancestors of the American Indians." Most LDS adherents believe, and all the LDS prophets have taught, that Israelites are the principal ancestors of the American Indians. It is therefore absurd to claim that what the scientists are discovering about Indian heritage is irrelevant. Scientists are inadvertently asking the same question posed by the Book of Mormon, and LDS beliefs about Indian ancestry fall squarely into the scientific field of anthropology. Molecular anthropologists are uncovering evidence that is directly relevant to LDS beliefs in this area.
2. Mitochondrial DNA only tells us about one ancestral line out of many. If we go back ten generations, it only tells us about 1 in 1,024 of our ancestors. If we go back another ten generations, it only tells us about 1 in over a million of our ancestors. On the surface this argument appears impressive; but it is an argument with little substance. The vast majority of mitochondrial lineages found throughout the world can be grouped into less than twenty-five major family groups represented by letters A, H, X, and so on. If we look at American Indians, essentially all of their mitochondrial lineages fall into one of five major families: A, B, C, D or X, none of which were derived from Israel. If we go back twenty generations, we are not talking about millions of unknowable mitochondrial lineages in an American Indian’s pedigree chart. We are talking about five lineages. All of those million-odd ancestral slots would be occupied by the same five regional mitochondrial lines. Even those that end up in males and are not passed on to the next generation came from the same five sources. It is possible that some lineages may not have been detected yet or have been lost in time through chance, but these would have been very rare mitochondrial family lines.
3. We don’t know what Israelite DNA from Book of Mormon times looks like. We know that Lehi and his associates in the Book of Mormon were Israelites, and we know a great deal about the DNA lineages of living people whose ancestors were Israelites reaching back 2600 years ago. Israelite DNA lineages belong to the same family groups found in European populations: the H, I, J, K, N, T, U, V, W and X groups. Essentially all Europeans and Israelites possess one of these lineages. In fact, other Middle Eastern populations such as the Syrians, Egyptians, Lebanese and other Arabic groups have similar mitochondrial DNA lineages belonging to these families. There is a smattering (<0.4%) of lineages in American Indian populations that are clearly, exclusively of European origin, most probably from Spain, rather than from the Middle East. However, scientists justifiably assume that these lineages represent post-Columbus intermixing. The lineages in question are most common in North American tribes that had the greatest impact with Europeans and are very uncommon in Mesoamerica, which FARMS claims is the only "plausible" site for the Book of Mormon. European mitochondrial lineages are also extremely rare in Polynesia.
4. The X lineage could be evidence for Israelite ancestry. American Indian X lineages share a common ancestral lineage with Siberian X lineages. It is also clear that American Indian X lineages have been in the New World for in excess of 15,000 years. American Indian X lineages are distantly related to Israelite or European X lineages. In fact, most Israelite X lineage are now grouped in a different family, the N family, because they are so different from Asian and American X lineages. The X line has also been found in ancient remains that pre-date the Book of Mormon period.
5. The mitochondrial DNA lineages tell us nothing about the male lineages. This is correct, but Y chromosome studies among Native Americans show equally strong links to Asia (>90%) as do studies among Polynesians (>90%). There is a higher presence of lineages that are of exclusively European origin, but this is not surprising given that males, beginning with Spanish explorers, dominated the early European conquest of the Americas and Polynesia.
6. The wives of the early Book of Mormon colonists (Sariah and others) may have been Asian (since their ancestry is not specifically mentioned) and could have brought the A, B, C, D, and X lineages to the Americas. It is exceedingly unlikely that Asians carrying Asian lineages traveled to Israel where they intermarried with the ancestors of the Lehites and Mulekites. If this did occur, we would expect to see (but do not see) Asian lineages among Middle Eastern populations. The amount of DNA variation found in each of the five American Indian female DNA lineage families indicates that they have been present in the Americas for at least 15,000 years, possibly longer. This predates the existence of Israel by many thousands of years.
7. The bottleneck effect, genetic drift, and other technical problems would prevent us from detecting Israelite genes. In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites, say less than thirty, entered such a massive native population, it would be very hard to detect their genes today. However, such a scenario does not square with what the Book of Mormon plainly states and with what the prophets have taught for 175 years.
8. When God changed the skin color of American Indians, He could have changed the DNA as well. If so, why would God change the DNA so it matched Asian DNA? As Latter-day Saints, we have already offended Blacks and the Indians. Are we going to offend Asians now, as well?
9. We don’t yet know enough about the earliest colonization of the Americas. Evidence points to Australians, Japanese, or even Europeans existing alongside the first Siberian colonists. I’m going to address this claim in a little more depth because it is presently an area of considerable debate among scientists. First of all, the consensus among scientists is that the Siberian migration, which began in excess of 14,000 years ago, accounts for all or nearly all of the ancestors of the American Indians. There is currently no genetic evidence to support the arrival of any other people to the Americas before the arrival of Columbus. However, scientists have been intrigued to find that many of the oldest human skulls in the Americas differ morphologically from those of contemporary Native Americans. A recent widely publicized case was the discovery of Kennewick Man in the banks of the Columbia River in Washington state. Some anthropologists have argued that these early skulls more closely resemble Europeans, the Ainu of Japan, or Australians.
The possibility that other groups arrived in America before the Siberians has fired the imagination of journalists writing for television documentaries and magazines that appeal to broad audiences. In addition, LDS apologists have been interested in this potential evidence for immigrants to the Americas besides the Siberians and have been quick to publicize these reports.1 Their conclusion is that this reinforces the possibility that Israelites might have also migrated to the Americas.
In the widely viewed BBC documentary Ancient Voices, evidence that the first Americans may have come from Australia seemed compelling at first even though the only genetic traces of these hypothetical Australian founders resided in the distinctive skull morphology of Tierra del Fuegians, the people of the remote islands at the southernmost tip of South America.2 But this meager evidence led to speculation about marathon ocean voyages by Australians and their subsequent massacre at the hands of invaders from Asia.3
Less well publicized was the fact that scientists later isolated DNA from the remains of ninety-four ancient Tierra del Fuegians. No DNA lineages that originated in Australia were observed; all the samples were found to posses the expected mitochondrial DNA lineages that are common to contemporary Native Americans.4
In a more recent report in Discover magazine, scientists from John Moores University in Liverpool made similarly bold claims about the Pericu people, a Native American group that lived in Baja California in Mexico from 2500 years ago until the late 1800s.5
Their skulls look more European or Australian than Asian, which led to speculation that their ancestors may have been Australians, who in turn may have been the first Americans. One scientist hinted that preliminary DNA results suggested compatibility with the idea of an Australian origin. It was then reported that the final results of these DNA tests on the Pericu samples were not as exciting as first anticipated.6
In fact, the tests conclusively identified Native American DNA lineages. After corresponding with the author of this report, I learned that the research will be published later this year. It would be unlikely if publication generated the same level of publicity as the earlier report.
When the skull of Kennewick Man was found in Washington, scientists were eager to determine the lineage. Unfortunately, repeated attempts by biologists from the University of California at Davis, the University of Michigan, and Yale University have failed to detect ancient DNA in the remains. Most likely, environmental conditions at the site were not conducive to DNA preservation. Despite this failure, scientists remain optimistic that, if not Kennewick Man, then some others of the earliest skulls will contain analyzable DNA. In light of the molecular research on the Pericu and Tierra del Fuegians, it is likely that the DNA lineages of these other early Americans will be similar to that of their descendants.
FOOTNOTES
1. Mike Segaloff, "Photographic Evidence for the Authenticity of the Book of Mormon," at The Book of Mormon.com: An Exploration of the Authenticity of the LDS Scriptures (www.the-book-of-mormon.com); Jeff Lindsay, "Does DNA Evidence Refute the Book of Mormon?" oneline at LDS FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions about Latter-day Saint Beliefs (www.jefflindsay.com/).
2. Walter Neves and Hector Pucciarelli. "The Zhoukoudian Upper Cave Skull 101 as Seen from the Americas," Journal of Human Evolution 34 (1998): 219-22.
3. "First Americans Were Australian," BBC News: World Edition, Aug. 26, 1999.
4. Jaume García-Bour, Alejandro Pérez-Pérez, Sara Álvarez, et al., "Early Population Differentiation in Extinct Aborigines from Tierra del Fuego-Patagonia: Ancient mtDNA Sequences and Y-Chromosome STR Characterization," American Journal of Physical Anthropology 123 (2004): 361-70; Carles Lalueza, Alejandro Pérez-Pérez, E. Prats, et al., "Lack of Founding Amerindian Mitochondrial DNA Lineages in Extinct Aborigines from Tierra del Fuego-Patagonia," Human Molecular Genetics 6 (1997): 41-6.
5. David Epstein, "First Americans May Have Come from Australia," Discover 26 (2005).6. Rex Dalton, "Skeleton Keys," Nature, 3 Feb. 3, 2005, 454-6.
Author’s note: I may add to my list of apologetic claims as time goes on and more appear.