Native American DNA points to Siberia, not Israel

Contested

LDS scholars have a real answer here. Say so before your friend does.

What the genetics show

Three kinds of test have been run on Native American DNA. The mother line, called mitochondrial.

The father line, from the Y chromosome. And the whole genome.

All three point the same way: to Siberia and East Asia. People crossed at Beringia more than 15,000 years ago.

No Middle Eastern founding line from about 600 BC has been found.

Who published it

Two Latter-day Saint scientists. Thomas Murphy, an anthropologist, and Simon Southerton, a geneticist and former bishop.

They published in 2002 and 2003. Murphy faced a disciplinary council, postponed 24 hours before it met.

Southerton was disciplined.

What changed in 2006

The introduction to the Book of Mormon was quietly reworded. The Lamanites had been "the principal ancestors of the American Indians." They became "among the ancestors."

Their answer, at full strength

The church's own Gospel Topics essay grants that most Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA. Then it makes real points.

The text never says Lehi's party was alone. A group of about 30 joining a large population leaves no detectable signal after 2,600 years.

Founder effect, genetic drift and the bottleneck after contact each erase small lines. Ugo Perego notes the Asian ancestor of haplogroup X2a is itself missing from modern Asia.

And the essay's own bottom line is that DNA "cannot be used decisively to either affirm or reject" the book.

How strong is this argument?

Genuinely arguable, and be careful. The population genetics is sound, and anyone who says DNA disproves the book has overstated it.

But look at the price. The answer works only by shrinking the Nephites into a small group inside a continent already full of Asians.

2 Nephi 1:8-9 says the land was "kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations." And it took an unannounced edit to the printed introduction.

What to say

"Why did the introduction change from 'principal ancestors' to 'among the ancestors'?"

A diagram of the DNA double helix, the evidence used to trace founding population ancestry

A map of the Bering land bridge, the route the genetic evidence supports for the first Americans

How they answer this — at its strongest

A party of 30 joining a large population leaves no trace after 2,600 years.

The church's own Gospel Topics essay grants that 'the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA'. It then answers on five fronts.

Nothing in the text says Lehi's party was the only population. The introduction was a 1981 editorial addition, not scripture, and 2006 corrected an over-reading.

A founding party of about 30 joining an already-large population would leave a signal below detection after 2,600 years. That is standard population genetics, not special pleading. Founder effect, drift and the bottleneck after contact each erase small founding lines. And we do not know the ancient Israelite genetic profile to look for.

Ugo Perego, a population geneticist, notes that the Asian ancestor of haplogroup X2a is itself undetected in modern Asia. Real founding lines do go missing. The essay's own bottom line is that DNA studies 'cannot be used decisively to either affirm or reject' the book.

The verdict

Take care: the science is sound, but their fix shrinks the Nephites to a tiny group.

The population-genetics reply is technically sound. Drift, founder effects and the bottleneck genuinely can erase a small founding line. Critics who say DNA disproves the book overstate what a blank result can do.

The concession is still enormous. The defence works only by shrinking the Book of Mormon peoples into a marginal group inside a continent already full of Asians. That cuts against the text itself. 2 Nephi 1:8-9 has the land 'kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations'. It also cuts against 150 years of prophetic teaching.

And it took an unannounced edit to the printed introduction. That is the most concrete institutional concession in this whole list.

Open this case in the full study tool →